To amend sections 4151.01, 4151.02, 4151.03, 4151.04, 4151.05, 4151.06, and 4151.07 of the Revised Code to require additional Ohio employers to use E-verify and to prohibit certain employment practices.
HB921 would expand Ohio’s existing E-Verify requirements beyond the current nonresidential construction context to cover additional categories of employers and workers. As introduced, the bill defines “covered employee” to include individuals working for construction contractors, subcontractors, and labor brokers on nonresidential construction projects, as well as child care staff members, employees of schools, colleges, and universities, and employees of the state or political subdivisions. Covered employers would be required to verify employment eligibility through the federal E-Verify system, retain verification records, and refrain from continuing to employ a person after a final nonconfirmation from the program.
The bill also creates an enforcement framework centered on the attorney general and the director of commerce. It establishes complaint procedures, investigation authority, fines for violations, hearing rights, and a process for disqualifying repeat violators from bidding on or participating in state contracts for up to two years. In more serious cases, if a court finds that a covered employer knowingly employed an unauthorized alien, the bill requires permanent revocation of certain business licenses. Fine revenue would be deposited into a new E-Verify enforcement fund to support administration and enforcement.
HB921 would amend and replace existing provisions in Chapter 4151 of the Revised Code governing employment verification and related penalties. It would impose new compliance duties on covered employers, require state agencies to include E-Verify compliance clauses in construction and renovation contracts for nonresidential projects, and direct the attorney general to review agency contracts for compliance. It also gives the director of administrative services a role in maintaining lists of disqualified contractors and reviewing certain state contracts.
The bill’s general sentiment, based on the bill text and lack of recorded committee debate or votes, appears to be strongly enforcement-oriented and aimed at tightening immigration-related hiring compliance. Because the measure was only introduced and no committee transcript or vote history is available, there is no documented public record here of support or opposition from lawmakers in the available materials.
The main points of contention likely center on the bill’s expansion of E-Verify mandates, its broad coverage of public-sector and education-related employers, and its penalties, including contract disqualification and license revocation. The bill also includes a provision barring investigations based solely on race, color, or national origin, which suggests sensitivity to profiling concerns, but the overall enforcement structure could still raise concerns among employers, contractors, labor groups, and civil liberties advocates about administrative burden, false nonconfirmations, and the impact on hiring and contracting.
HB921 would substantially expand Chapter 4151 of the Revised Code by broadening the set of Ohio employers subject to E-Verify requirements and by adding new enforcement, penalty, and procurement provisions. It would affect construction contractors, subcontractors, labor brokers, child care providers, schools, colleges, universities, and public employers, while also requiring state agencies to include E-Verify compliance language in nonresidential construction and renovation contracts. The bill would create new duties for the attorney general, the director of commerce, and the director of administrative services, and would establish an E-Verify enforcement fund financed by penalties.
The available record suggests the bill is intended to strengthen immigration-related employment verification and deter unauthorized hiring, with an emphasis on compliance and enforcement. Because the bill was only introduced and there are no committee transcripts or votes in the provided materials, there is no formal recorded legislative sentiment beyond the bill’s text. The structure of the proposal indicates a pro-enforcement posture, but no direct evidence of support or opposition from members is available here.
Likely points of contention include the expansion of E-Verify to additional sectors, especially public employers and education institutions, and the severity of penalties for violations, including escalating fines, state-contract disqualification, and permanent license revocation for knowingly employing unauthorized aliens. Employers and contractors may object to the administrative burden and the risk of erroneous nonconfirmations, while labor and civil rights advocates may focus on the potential for discriminatory enforcement or chilling effects on hiring. The bill attempts to address profiling concerns by prohibiting investigations based solely on race, color, or national origin, but that safeguard may not fully resolve concerns about implementation and enforcement.