Ohio House Bill HB461

Ohio 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 9/17/25

Caption

To enact sections 341.193, 753.022, and 5120.052 of the Revised Code to require municipal and county correctional facilities and state correctional institutions to provide inmates who are deaf, hard of hearing, or severely speech impaired with access to teletypewriters.

Summary

HB461 would require county correctional facilities, municipal correctional facilities, and state correctional institutions in Ohio to provide inmates who are deaf, hard of hearing, or severely speech impaired with access to teletypewriters (TTYs) at no cost. The bill creates new sections in the Revised Code defining the covered facilities and the communication device, and it prohibits those facilities from denying TTY access to eligible inmates. The measure is focused on communication access in correctional settings, ensuring that inmates with hearing or severe speech disabilities can use a device commonly associated with telephone communication and other text-based communication services. It applies broadly across local and state custody settings, including jails, workhouses, correctional centers, and state prisons.

Impact

HB461 would add new statutory duties for county, municipal, and state correctional facilities by requiring them to provide TTY access free of charge to inmates who are deaf, hard of hearing, or severely speech impaired. It would also create an explicit prohibition against denying such access, which could affect facility policies, procurement, inmate services, and compliance practices across Ohio correctional systems.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the available record suggests a straightforward access-and-accommodation measure with an equity and disability-rights orientation. The bill’s sponsors and cosponsors indicate some legislative support at introduction, but there is no documented debate in the provided materials to show broader support or opposition.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the provided committee transcripts or voting history. Potential areas of practical concern, if raised later, could include implementation costs, staffing, security procedures, and how facilities would maintain and monitor TTY access while ensuring equal communication rights for affected inmates. However, no such objections are reflected in the available record.