Ohio’s anti-drag bill would ban bikinis and sports bras
WASHINGTON — Ohio lawmakers are facing criticism over a proposed “anti-drag” bill intended to protect children from what supporters describe as indecent exposure, with some legal scholars and advocacy groups warning the language could be interpreted far more broadly than intended.
The Ohio House of Representatives recently passed the “Indecent Exposure Modernization Act” (HB 249), which seeks to expand the legal definition of indecency and impose criminal penalties on certain adult performances in venues where minors are present. The bill is aimed at restricting access for children to drag shows and strip clubs.
Under the proposal, it would be illegal to knowingly expose private areas “with the purpose of personal sexual arousal or gratification or to lure the minor into sexual activity,” in situations involving physical proximity to individuals outside one’s household.
Critics argue the wording is overly vague and could lead to unintended consequences. In a recent opinion column, Dan Kobil, a constitutional law professor at Capital University Law School in Columbus, suggested the language could expose women to criminal liability for common clothing choices.
He argued that, under the bill, women in Ohio could potentially face arrest for wearing items such as bikinis, halter tops, or going without a bra in public. He also pointed to the bill’s shift from the term “private parts” to “private area,” which he said could be interpreted to include female breasts when nude or covered only by undergarments.
Kobil warned that such language could give law enforcement broad discretion in determining what constitutes illegal exposure.
LGBTQ advocates have raised similar concerns, arguing the bill could be applied in ways that extend beyond its stated intent of regulating adult entertainment. The measure passed the Ohio House 63–32 and now moves to the state Senate. It would also require approval from outgoing Ohio Governor Mike DeWine before becoming law.
State Representative Angie King, a Republican and one of the bill’s primary sponsors, rejected those interpretations. She described the criticism as “the peak of fear mongering,” arguing the legislation is narrowly focused on protecting children from adult-oriented performances and imagery.
The peak of fear mongering. The author claims Ohio HB 249 will jail women for going braless in a T-shirt.
HB 249 is about shielding kids from adult performances & imagery —not policing whether women wear bras, bikinis, or T-shirts.
Twisting it into “women could be jailed for… https://t.co/J1u8jMlkBd
— Angie King (@AngieNadineKing) April 14, 2026
“HB 249 is about shielding kids from adult performances & imagery—not policing whether women wear bras, bikinis, or T-shirts,” King said, calling claims that it could criminalize everyday clothing choices “a deliberate misrepresentation.”
She added that the intent of the bill is to maintain clear boundaries between adult entertainment venues and minors, not to regulate public dress in general.
Supporters of the measure argue it is necessary to ensure that drag performances and strip club environments remain restricted to adult audiences, while critics maintain the language risks overreach.
The bill’s text specifically references “adult cabaret” performances, including topless dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, and entertainers who appeal to a “prurient interest,” as well as performers whose gender presentation differs from their sex assigned at birth using clothing, makeup, or prosthetics.
Similar legislation has been introduced in other states, including Montana and Tennessee, as part of broader efforts to limit minors’ exposure to certain types of live adult performances.
Representative Josh Williams, another Republican supporter of the bill, was also contacted for comment.
About Post Author
