State Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Loveland speaking alongside state Reps. Adam Mathews, R-Lebanon, and state Sens. Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, Hearcel Craig, D-Columbus and Steve Huffman, R-Tipp City. (Photo by Nick Evans, Ohio Capital Journal.)

Ohio lawmakers from both chambers and both sides of the aisle announced a measure Tuesday that would abolish the death penalty and prohibit any state funding from supporting abortion services or physician-assisted suicide.

Ohio law already bars state funding from subsidizing abortion, and physician-assisted suicide isn’t legal in Ohio. But the sponsors described their three-part approach as a statement of values bridging the gap between two very different political outlooks. The proposal’s big tent approach to “pro-life” mirrors the Catholic church’s positioning on the idea, and representatives from the church were on hand to lend their support.

Sponsors placed their greatest emphasis on ending the death penalty, but outside groups are criticizing lawmakers for connecting three different policy questions and warning the bill could undermine access to abortion care.

Sponsors’ take

State Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Loveland, described how she previously supported the death penalty when she served in the Ohio legislature 20 years ago. What changed her mind was a book written by former Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro. A few years ago, he co-wrote an op-ed with former Governor Bob Taft and former Attorney General Lee Fisher urging lawmakers to repeal the death penalty, explaining the punishment is expensive, ineffective, and unjust.

Schmidt framed her current stance as a question of human dignity.

“Abortion, the death penalty, and assisted suicide all undermine the commitment to human dignity,” she argued. “To be consistent with our pro-life principles, we must oppose all three.

Schmidt argued that all three proposals support the affirmation of life.

“Our legislation will make sure that the state of Ohio does not fund death and preserves tax dollars for alternatives which promote life,” she argued. “Our commitment to protecting human life must be unwavering; prohibiting state funding for abortion, assisted suicide, and the death penalty creates a consistent, life-affirming ethic that upholds the dignity of life.”

Across the aisle, meanwhile, state Sen. Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, focused on practical resources.

“Abolishing the death penalty is pragmatic,” she argued. “According to the Ohio Legislative Service Commission, abolishing the practice could save the state between $128 and $384 million. Can you imagine what kinds of proactive policies we could do with that?”

Even as she insisted “the time to abolish Ohio’s death penalty is now — it has been for a long time,” she didn’t point to a particular ideal, but rather shifting political winds.

The new Trump administration wants to re-start capital punishment at the federal level and just last year lawmakers in Ohio proposed alternative methods to jumpstart executions.

“We stand here today, progressive Democrats and conservative Republican colleagues,” Antonio said. “We may use different language to explain where we stand on the spectrum of our beliefs, but we agree that there is a moral imperative to end the use of the death penalty in the state of Ohio.”

Schmidt and Antonio were joined by state Rep. Adam Mathews, R-Lebanon, and state Sens. Hearcel Craig, D-Columbus and Steve Huffman, R-Tipp City.

They’re still hammering out the final text of the legislation, although Mathews, in particular, noted they would draft it to ensure the proposal is not ‘severable’ — i.e. a court can’t remove one aspect of the legislation after the fact and leave the other provisions in effect.

Tough crowd

Although the measure’s sponsors indicated they’ve lined up several more lawmakers ready to sign on to their bill, they’ll face an uphill climb. Antonio backed a death penalty repeal with Huffman last session, and Schmidt sponsored companion legislation in the House. Neither bill cleared its committee.

Ohio House holds first hearing for new nitrogen gas death penalty method

Meanwhile, state Reps. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, and Phil Plummer, R-Dayton, sponsored a bill last year allowing executions to go forward using a process known as nitrogen hypoxia.

“Well look, I mean, I fundamentally disagree with the premise,” Stewart said of the proposal eliminating the death penalty and blocking funding for abortion or physician-assisted suicide.

“I don’t think there’s support in the state,” he continued, “or certainly in the Republican caucus, for eliminating the death penalty.”

Stewart plans to reintroduce the nitrogen hypoxia bill, and like Antonio, he brought up the new presidential administration.

“This week, President Trump introduced an executive order that I think puts the federal government squarely in favor of the death penalty,” he argued, “not only at the federal level, but it actually directs the entire federal apparatus to support states in obtaining lethal injection drugs and in preserving laws that enable capital punishment in all the states.”

The proposal also got pushback from the Ohio chapters of the ACLU and Planned Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood Executive Director Lauren Blauvelt called the measure “anti-democratic” and argued it shows “how low out of touch politicians will go to taint popular legislation with abortion stigma.”

“The sad reality is that what should have been a focused effort to end the death penalty in Ohio devolved into yet another anti-abortion spectacle,” Blauvelt said. “We can end the death penalty without sacrificing the gains we made for reproductive freedom. While ending the death penalty in Ohio has been long overdue, conservative politicians have added unconstitutional abortion restrictions as a Trojan horse allowing our government to dictate our personal health care decisions.”

In a joint statement, ACLU of Ohio Legal Director Freda Levenson and Policy Director Jocelyn Rosnick blasted the bill for “manipulatively interweav(ing)” unrelated issues and expressed disappointment given what they see as progress building a coalition in opposition to the death penalty.

“Our organization has maintained an anti-death penalty stance since our founding,” they said, “but this ‘bait and switch’ bill is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, slyly designed to limit how public funds can be used for abortion care and coverage. Furthermore, supporting death with dignity is a longstanding ACLU principle.”

The sponsors insisted that nothing in their bill would violate the reproductive rights amendment approved by voters in 2023, but the ACLU isn’t so sure. In particular, they worry the blanket prohibition on state funding could wind up denying access to abortion medications.

“This proposed legislation violates the Ohio Constitution by deliberately undercutting the Reproductive Freedom Amendment,” they warned. “Should this bill pass, litigation is not off the table.”