A bill in Ohio would end state-sanctioned traditional, house-banked online sports betting.
The Save Ohio Sports Act (HB 971) would confine legal house-banked sports betting to Ohio’s four brick-and-mortar casinos, effectively prohibiting state-licensed platforms such as DraftKings Sportsbook and FanDuel Sportsbook.
Such a law could provide relief for Ohioans affected by gambling addiction.
Separately, Ohio is fighting to block so-called “prediction market” sports betting, which the state argues is unlawful gambling. Prediction markets, such as Kalshi, argue they are legal and regulated by the federal government.
Save Ohio Sports Act Provisions
In addition to limiting traditional sports betting to brick-and-mortar casinos, the bill would prohibit in-game betting (also known as micro-betting), proposition bets, parlay bets, and wagers on collegiate athletics.
It also bans the use of debt to place bets, restricts financial inducements in direct marketing, and limits sports betting advertisements in sports venues and during live broadcasts.
The legislation would also cap individual wagers at $100 and limit bettors to eight wagers within a 24-hour period.
Introduction Delay
The Center for Christian Virtue (CCV) in Columbus announced the legislation in April, and the legislation was formally introduced on June 29, CCV said.
The bill’s sponsors changed, delaying its formal introduction.
In April, the announced sponsors were:
- Rep. Riordan McClain (R-Upper Sandusky)
- Rep. Gary Click (R-Vickery)
- Rep. Johnathan Newman (R-Troy)
- Rep. Kevin Ritter (R-Marietta)
Currently, the sponsors are:
- Rep. Beth Lear (R-Galena)
- Rep. Johnathan Newman (R-Troy)
Due to addiction harm and threats to sports integrity, legal online sports betting is a controversial issue, with both sides of the policy question facing political risk.
A group of online sports betting firms reportedly established a Super PAC with a $48-million war chest to influence statehouse races this year. The bill’s initial sponsors may have reasoned that their sponsorship hurt them politically.
Would the Governor Sign the Bill?
The Save Ohio Sports Act follows recent comments by Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine expressing regret over legalizing sports betting in 2021. The Republican governor has said Ohio should not have legalized it.
The Associated Press reported in November 2025 that DeWine said he would sign a repeal of Ohio’s sports betting law if lawmakers sent him one, though he did not think the votes were there.
In 2025, a pair of pitchers on the Cleveland Guardians were indicted for alleged gambling-related crimes involving micro-bets. It was the most significant gambling scandal impacting Major League Baseball in decades, and it drew the ire of DeWine.
DeWine, who can’t run for a third term as governor, will leave office in 2027.
Public Opinion Turns
The Save Ohio Sports Act comes as American attitudes toward legal online sports betting have deteriorated in recent years. According to the Pew Research Center, opposition among men under 30 more than doubled from 2022 to 2025.
Americans spent over $16 billion on state-sanctioned sports betting platforms in 2025, with 60% of online bettors reporting that they have chased their losses. Legal sports betting has been linked to food insecurity and population-level financial harm.
Ohio is not the first state to consider legislation to repeal legal online sports betting. Maryland and Vermont have had similar bills, but neither state successfully passed the reform.
Ohio’s efforts to reform sports betting face a difficult legislative fight. The Save Ohio Sports Act would not address prediction markets, which facilitate stock-market-style wagering. Offshore gambling sites would still target Ohioans, but those are much more limited in reach than state-sanctioned apps.
DraftKings, FanDuel, and Fanatics, three traditional online sportsbooks operating in Ohio, offer prediction-style sports betting platforms in states where sports betting isn’t legal. They may turn to these products if Ohio prohibited traditional online betting.
Legal experts say the U.S. Supreme Court could eventually weigh in on CFTC-regulated “sports event contracts.”
