- Ohio Rep. Thaddeus Claggett’s HB 469 would deny AI systems marriage-related legal status and legal personhood. [1] - New Jersey Assemblyman Paul Kanitra’s A2710 would target providers of romantic AI simulations, with civil penalties of up to $25,000 per violation. [2] - U.S. marriage law covers unions between two individuals, and no U.S. jurisdiction located in this review recognizes an AI as a spouse.
[3] Lawmakers in Ohio and New Jersey are drafting measures aimed at keeping human-AI relationships outside marriage law, even though no U.S. jurisdiction currently recognizes an artificial-intelligence system as a legal spouse. [1][2][3]
Two different legal approaches #
Ohio House Bill 469, sponsored by Republican Rep. Thaddeus Claggett, would declare AI systems nonsentient and prohibit them from being married, holding a domestic status, owning property, or bearing liability. The bill remains in committee and has not passed the Ohio House. [1][4]
New Jersey Assembly Bill 2710, sponsored by Republican Assemblyman Paul Kanitra, takes aim at the companies rather than the marriage license. Its proposed “Authentic Relationships Act” would prohibit providers from designing, marketing, or making available AI systems intended to imitate or encourage intimate, romantic, or sexual relationships, except for narrowly defined medical uses. It would allow civil penalties of up to $25,000 per violation and private lawsuits for resulting harm. The measure is pre-filed and pending technical review. [2][5] The legal rights at issue are therefore mostly hypothetical. Federal law defines marriage for federal purposes as a marriage between “2 individuals” that is valid under state law, while constitutional marriage doctrine protects the rights of human couples. [3] [6] Family-law scholar Clare Huntington has argued that AI companions raise real questions about vulnerability, privacy, emotional abuse and corporate power, but her proposed framework focuses on regulating those relationships rather than granting AI marital status.
Symbolic AI wedding ceremonies reported in Japan have likewise carried no legal standing.
[[7]](https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/minnlrev/vol110/iss1/2/)
[[8]](https://www.euronews.com/next/2025/12/18/japanese-woman-marries-chatgpt-ai-character-in-symbolic-ceremony)## Further sources
[[1] Ohio House Bill 469 official page and legislative analysis. ↗](https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legislation/136/hb469)
[[2] New Jersey Assembly Bill 2710, the proposed Authentic Relationships Act. ↗](https://pub.njleg.gov/Bills/2026/A3000/2710_I1.HTM)
[[3] 1 U.S.C. § 7, federal definition of marriage for federal-law purposes. ↗](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?edition=prelim&num=0&req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title1-section7)
[[4] Ohio Legislative Service Commission analysis of HB 469. ↗](https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/download?key=26176)
[[5] New Jersey legislative roster identifying Paul Kanitra as a Republican assembly… ↗](https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/financial-disclosure-forms)
[[6] Congress.gov Constitution Annotated discussion of marriage and substantive due … ↗](https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt14-S1-6-3-5/ALDE_00013819/)+2 more
The stories that matter, in one email. Free — unsubscribe anytime.