Toledo, Ohio — A controversial bill aimed at curbing what supporters describe as “campus cancel culture” was advanced by Ohio’s GOP-controlled Senate on Wednesday. Senate Bill 1, formally known as the Advance Ohio Higher Education Act, seeks to overhaul a range of practices and policies at the state’s colleges and universities, sparking a fierce debate on the future of higher education in Ohio.
The bill, which passed the Senate by a vote of 21-11, is largely supported by Republican lawmakers who argue that it will restore academic freedom and provide a more balanced, neutral educational environment. However, critics, particularly Democrats and university faculty, contend that it will erode academic autonomy and undermine the inclusive, diverse nature of higher education.
Key provisions of the bill include a ban on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) practices, a prohibition on full-time faculty strikes, and requirements that professors remain neutral on “controversial beliefs or policies.” Additionally, the bill mandates that course syllabi be made publicly available online, introduces a civics class requirement for students, and bans donations from China to Ohio’s public colleges.
Sen. Jerry Cirino, a Republican from Kirtland and the bill’s sponsor, framed the legislation as a victory for free speech and academic freedom. In a statement following the Senate vote, Cirino declared that the bill would usher in “a golden age for higher education in the state of Ohio.” He emphasized that the bill would empower faculty to express their views more freely, fostering an environment of greater speech and academic exchange.
“More faculty will be able to express their views freely. That means more speech and more academic freedom,” Cirino added.
However, the bill has sparked intense opposition, particularly from Democrats and higher education advocates. Sen. William DeMora, a Democrat from Columbus, called the legislation the “Ohio Higher Education Destruction Act,” warning that it would dismantle the foundation of higher education in the state. He criticized the bill’s provision banning faculty strikes, claiming it would strip faculty members of essential labor rights.
During the legislative session, hundreds of people submitted testimony in opposition to the bill, and protests erupted in the Senate chamber following the vote. Many opponents argue that the bill’s provisions would stifle academic expression, limit faculty autonomy, and eliminate essential diversity efforts that help ensure equitable educational opportunities for all students.
The bill’s proposed ban on DEI practices has particularly drawn fire. State Rep. Josh Williams, a Republican from Sylvania Township, testified in favor of the bill, explaining that he found DEI programs to be “offensive.” “DEI, to me, is offensive,” Williams said. “It means that the only reason I’m in the room is because of the color of my skin, not how hard I work my butt off to get here.”
The bill has now moved to the Ohio House for further consideration. Rep. Matt Huffman, the newly elected House Speaker and former Senate leader, has expressed support for the legislation, signaling that it may receive favorable treatment in the House, just as it did in the Senate last year under its earlier version, SB83. Although SB83 failed to advance in the House during the previous General Assembly after undergoing significant revisions, Huffman’s leadership in the House suggests the bill may have better chances of passage this time.
As the debate continues, higher education leaders in Ohio are preparing for further resistance, with many expressing concern that the bill’s passage could have a lasting impact on the state’s universities and the future of academic freedom. With protests likely to continue and discussions intensifying, the outcome of the bill remains uncertain, but its effects on Ohio’s higher education system could be profound.