Ohio Proposes Land Ownership Restrictions for Green Card Holders Near Critical Infrastructure

Ohio lawmakers have introduced House Bill 1 and Senate Bill 88, aiming to restrict land ownership by foreign nationals and some green card holders within 40 kilometers of critical infrastructure and military bases. The proposed legislation has sparked backlash for being overly broad and potentially discriminatory.

OhioLand OwnershipGreen Card HoldersNational SecurityDiscriminationReal EstateJun 07, 2025

Ohio Proposes Land Ownership Restrictions for Green Card Holders Near Critical Infrastructure

Real Estate:Ohio lawmakers have introduced House Bill 1 and Senate Bill 88, aiming to restrict land ownership by foreign nationals and some green card holders within 40 kilometers of critical infrastructure and military bases. These bills are part of a national movement targeting foreign land ownership due to national security concerns. If passed, individuals and companies from “foreign adversary” nations—such as China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela—would be barred from purchasing land near sensitive areas like water plants, power stations, and gas pipelines. Green card holders already owning land in these zones can retain it, though an earlier version of the bill required them to sell within two years.

Representative Angela King and Senator Terry Johnson, the sponsors, emphasized the importance of protecting U.S. land from espionage and threats to national safety. The Ohio Secretary of State would be responsible for maintaining and updating a list of restricted entities every six months.

However, the proposed legislation has sparked backlash for being overly broad and potentially discriminatory. Critics argue that the bills unfairly target immigrants, especially those of Asian descent. Vincent Wang of the Asian American Coalition of Ohio called the bills part of a “racist agenda.” At a recent Senate hearing, over 230 people submitted testimony opposing the legislation. Speakers included immigrants, legal experts, and students like 14-year-old Melody Miao, who expressed fears of exclusion despite growing up fully American.

Civil rights groups like the ACLU warned of constitutional challenges if the laws are enacted, labelling them xenophobic and racially motivated. Democratic lawmakers, including Rep. Munira Abdullahi, echoed these concerns, warning the bills may harm immigrants without improving security.

The proposals follow similar efforts in states like Florida and Texas. Although Ohio Governor Mike DeWine previously vetoed a related measure in 2023, the future of HB 1 and SB 88 remains uncertain, with no vote scheduled yet.

In summary, Ohio’s proposed House Bill 1 and Senate Bill 88 seek to ban land ownership near critical infrastructure by nationals from “foreign adversary” countries. Critics argue the measures are discriminatory, xenophobic, and legally questionable. Over 230 testimonies opposed the bills, warning they marginalize immigrants and may face constitutional challenges if passed.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are House Bill 1 and Senate Bill 88 in Ohio?

House Bill 1 and Senate Bill 88 in Ohio aim to restrict land ownership by foreign nationals and some green card holders within 40 kilometers of critical infrastructure and military bases.

Which countries are considered 'foreign adversaries' in these bills?

The 'foreign adversary' countries mentioned in the bills include China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela.

What are the main criticisms of these bills?

Critics argue that the bills are overly broad, potentially discriminatory, and may face constitutional challenges. They also claim the measures are xenophobic and racially motivated.

What is the role of the Ohio Secretary of State in these bills?

The Ohio Secretary of State would be responsible for maintaining and updating a list of restricted entities every six months.

What is the current status of these bills?

The future of House Bill 1 and Senate Bill 88 remains uncertain, with no vote scheduled yet. Ohio Governor Mike DeWine previously vetoed a related measure in 2023.