Background of the Complaint

House Bill 265, signed into law by Governor Mike DeWine, is set to take effect on April 9, 2025. This bill amends Ohio Revised Code § 2323.52 and imposes unconstitutional restrictions on individuals designated as “vexatious litigators.” Specifically, it introduces two troubling provisions:

O.R.C. § 2323.52(J)(1): Requires individuals classified as vexatious litigators to obtain court approval before making public records requests, giving courts undue discretion over citizens' ability to access government information.

O.R.C. § 2323.52(J)(2): Allows public offices to demand identification from suspected vexatious litigators, discouraging anonymous requests and further restricting government transparency.

These provisions pose significant concerns as they potentially violate several constitutional protections, including:

First Amendment: The right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

Fourteenth Amendment: Equal protection and due process guarantees.

Ohio Constitution Article II, Section 28: Prohibition against retroactive laws.

Unconstitutional Restrictions and Legal Violations

House Bill 265’s provisions raise serious questions about their constitutionality. The bill not only infringes on fundamental rights, but it also appears to violate core legal principles found in both Ohio and U.S. Constitutions. Let’s break down the legal implications.

1. Violations Under the Ohio Constitution: Retroactive Laws

Article II, Section 28 of the Ohio Constitution specifically prohibits retroactive laws. It states:

"The general assembly shall have no power to pass retroactive laws, that is, laws that interfere with vested rights or obligations."

House Bill 265’s provisions target individuals already designated as "vexatious litigators," retroactively subjecting them to new restrictions on accessing public records and petitioning the government. These individuals did not have notice of such restrictions when they were designated as vexatious litigators, and the imposition of these new rules constitutes a retroactive law that infringes upon their rights. The retroactive nature of this law undermines the fundamental constitutional principle that citizens should have fair notice of the legal consequences of their actions.

This violates Ohio's prohibition against retroactive laws, as the law changes the legal status of individuals and restricts their rights retroactively, which undermines the due process protections guaranteed by the Ohio Constitution.

2. Violations Under the U.S. Constitution: Ex Post Facto Laws

The Ex Post Facto Clause of the U.S. Constitution, found in Article I, Section 9, prohibits the government from passing laws that retroactively punish individuals for acts that were not criminal at the time they were committed. Specifically, it bars the government from making a law that:

Makes an act criminal that was not criminal when committed.

Increases the punishment for a crime after it was committed.

Alters the legal rules of evidence in a way that makes it more difficult for a defendant to defend themselves.

While House Bill 265 does not create new criminal offenses, it significantly changes the legal landscape for individuals designated as vexatious litigators. By imposing new restrictions on public records requests and petitioning rights, this bill effectively punishes these individuals for their past behavior—specifically their designation as vexatious litigators. This can be seen as an ex post facto violation because it retroactively affects their rights in a punitive manner, making it more difficult for them to engage in civic activities.

Moreover, this law undermines the foundational legal principle that individuals should not be subject to laws that punish past actions without warning. By imposing these new limitations, House Bill 265 penalizes individuals who were designated as vexatious litigators prior to the law’s enactment, thus violating the protections against ex post facto laws.

Impact of House Bill 265 on Constitutional Rights

The passage of House Bill 265 represents a significant encroachment on the constitutional rights of Ohioans, particularly in relation to the right to petition the government, the right to access public records, and the prohibition against retroactive or ex post facto laws.

First Amendment Concerns: The bill restricts the right of citizens to petition the government for redress of grievances by placing additional obstacles for those labeled as vexatious litigators. The First Amendment guarantees all citizens the right to petition their government, and these provisions impose undue burdens on this right.

Fourteenth Amendment Concerns: The bill also raises equal protection concerns. It targets individuals based on an arbitrary designation of "vexatious litigators" and punishes them with restrictions on their right to access government information and file legal actions. This could violate the Equal Protection Clause by subjecting these individuals to unfair and unequal treatment.

Government Transparency: By requiring public offices to demand identification from suspected vexatious litigators, the bill could significantly deter anonymous requests and further limit transparency in government. This erodes the fundamental principle that public records should be open to all citizens, without unnecessary restrictions or obstacles.

Conclusion

House Bill 265 imposes severe, unconstitutional restrictions on the rights of Ohioans, especially those labeled as vexatious litigators. By violating both the Ohio Constitution’s prohibition on retroactive laws and the U.S. Constitution’s protections against ex post facto laws, this legislation not only impinges on individual freedoms but also weakens the public’s ability to hold the government accountable.

The new law has far-reaching implications for transparency, access to public records, and citizens’ right to petition the government. These provisions effectively punish individuals based on past actions, infringe upon their constitutional rights, and undermine the core principles of democracy.

As this bill moves toward implementation, it is crucial to recognize the importance of defending constitutional rights and upholding the rule of law for all citizens, regardless of their legal history. For more updates and information on government overreach, stay connected with The Exposer.