CA: Prohibit slavery, involuntary servitude as criminal penalty
Summary
HJR5 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would ask Ohio voters to revise Article I, Section 6 of the Ohio Constitution. The measure would remove the current exception that allows slavery or involuntary servitude as punishment for crime, thereby prohibiting slavery and involuntary servitude in Ohio even in the criminal-justice context.
The resolution also adds language clarifying that, after a conviction, an Ohio court or probation/parole agency may still require a person to participate in education, counseling, treatment, community service, or other alternatives to incarceration as part of sentencing. The proposal states that these measures may be used to promote accountability, reformation, public safety, or rehabilitation, and it would take effect immediately if approved by a majority of voters at the November 4, 2025 general election.
Impact
If adopted, HJR5 would amend the Ohio Constitution and repeal the existing constitutional language that permits involuntary servitude as punishment for crime. This would change the legal framework governing criminal sentencing in Ohio by eliminating any constitutional basis for forced labor or similar compelled servitude as a penal sanction, while preserving courts’ and correctional agencies’ authority to impose noncustodial rehabilitative conditions and alternatives to incarceration. The amendment would directly affect the state constitution, criminal sentencing practices, and the authority of courts, probation departments, and parole agencies.
Sentiment
The bill text and available context suggest a strongly reform-oriented and rights-protective sentiment, with the proposal framed as a constitutional prohibition on slavery and involuntary servitude in all circumstances. The large list of cosponsors indicates notable support among House members, and the resolution’s language emphasizes rehabilitation and alternatives to incarceration rather than punitive labor. No committee testimony or recorded votes were provided, so there is no evidence in the supplied materials of organized opposition or divided debate.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the scope of the constitutional change: the proposal removes the criminal-penalty exception entirely, which could raise questions about prison labor, compelled work programs, and how correctional institutions may use inmate labor or mandatory programming. Supporters appear to favor the amendment as a civil-rights and anti-slavery measure, while potential critics would likely focus on operational impacts for the corrections system and whether the new language could limit traditional sentencing or institutional practices. The added sentence preserving education, counseling, treatment, community service, and other alternatives to incarceration appears designed to address some of those concerns by clarifying what remains permissible.
To amend sections 3517.12, 3517.13, and 3517.155 of the Revised Code to modify the Campaign Finance Law regarding foreign nationals and statewide initiatives and referenda and to declare an emergency.
To amend sections 3517.12, 3517.13, and 3517.155 of the Revised Code to modify the Campaign Finance Law regarding foreign nationals and statewide initiatives and referenda and to declare an emergency.
To amend sections 3505.01 and 3505.10 of the Revised Code to modify the deadline for a political party to certify its nominees for President and Vice-President to the Secretary of State.
To delay the deadline for a major political party to certify its presidential and vice presidential candidates to the Secretary of State for the 2024 general election.