POLISCOPE
Back to bills

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
High Impact

Ohio SB 437 withholds state funding from municipal corporations failing to cooperate with federal homeland security

Original title: Withhold state funding for noncooperation with homeland security

Last action · May 13, 2026: Referred to General GovernmentSponsors: Andrew Brenner and 1 other

Introduced
Committee
Floor Vote
Passed
Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

What This Bill Would Do

Ohio Senate Bill 437 withholds state funding from any municipal corporation that enacts policies hindering local employees from cooperating with federal homeland security and immigration activities. The bill also removes the Director of Public Safety's role in determining noncooperation.

Why it matters

Local governments that pass sanctuary-style ordinances or directives risk losing state homeland security funds, altering municipal funding eligibility and local policy enforcement.

Who It Would Affect

Groups the bill's text would affect if enacted, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

municipal corporations

Municipalities face the loss of state homeland security funding if they enact rules or policies that hinder cooperation with federal immigration and security activities.

Directly affected

state or local employees

Employees are required to comply with lawful requests for assistance under the USA Patriot Act and federal immigration or terrorism investigations, provided requests align with federalism.

Key Facts

You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.

Frequently Asked Questions

What happens if a municipal corporation passes a policy restricting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement?
The municipal corporation becomes ineligible to receive any homeland security funding available from the state.
Does expressing criticism of federal immigration policy violate the cooperation requirement?
No. State or local employee statements or municipal resolutions expressing disagreement with or critical opinions of federal immigration or terrorism policies do not qualify as unreasonable noncompliance or material hindrance.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Where This Stands

Currently in committee. The next step in the legislative lifecycle is Floor Vote.

Procedural history

2 actions
  1. May 13, 2026SenateCommittee
    Referred to General Government
  2. May 12, 2026SenateIntroduced
    Introduced

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Sponsors

Connected Entities

General Assembly, Director of Public Safety, Andrew Brenner and 2 more
OrganizationGeneral Assembly“General Assembly of the State of Ohio”Map →
otherDirector of Public Safety“Director whose role in determining noncooperation is removed”Map →
PersonAndrew Brenner“Senator, District 19”Map →
PersonGeorge Lang“Senator, District 4”Map →
OrganizationRevised Code“Ohio Revised Code section 9.63 being amended”Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.legislature.ohio.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance75
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy85
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment10
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz60
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record