Judge Temporarily Halts Ohio's Plan to Fund New Browns Stadium with Unclaimed Funds
Ohio's controversial strategy to utilise unclaimed funds for financing a new domed stadium for the Cleveland Browns has been temporarily blocked by a court order. The preliminary injunction was issued on Monday, effectively pausing the plan while legal proceedings unfold.
Legal Challenge and Constitutional Concerns
In her ruling, Franklin County Magistrate Jennifer Hunt determined that plaintiffs in a lawsuit, brought by former Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann, stand a substantial likelihood of prevailing on the merits of their case. The class-action lawsuit argues that provisions within Ohio's two-year, $60 billion budget, which allocated $1 billion from the state's Unclaimed Funds Account, violate constitutional prohibitions against taking private property for government use and infringe upon citizens' due process rights.
The funds were intended to support the construction of a stadium planned by Haslam Sports Group in suburban Brook Park, south of Cleveland. This financial manoeuvre was a highly debated topic during Ohio's budget planning last year, drawing significant public and political scrutiny.
Details of the Lawsuit and Funding Allocation
The legal action was filed by Marc Dann and former state Representative Jeffrey Crossman, both Democrats, on behalf of three named Ohio residents and all other individuals whose unclaimed funds were held by the state as of June 30, 2025. The litigation specifically challenges budget provisions that diverted over $1 billion to create an Ohio Cultural and Sports Facility Performance Grant Fund, with $600 million designated as the first grant for the Browns stadium project.
This funding strategy has sparked a broader debate about the appropriate use of unclaimed funds, which typically belong to individuals who have lost track of financial assets. The plaintiffs contend that redirecting these funds for a private sports facility constitutes an unconstitutional taking of property.
Political and Legal Reactions
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost's office has not immediately responded to requests for comment regarding the court's decision. Notably, before ending his gubernatorial bid last year, Yost, a Republican, publicly opposed using unclaimed funds for such purposes and even urged Governor Mike DeWine to veto the plan. Despite his personal objections, Yost has previously stated that he believed the plan was legally sound, highlighting the complex interplay between policy preferences and legal interpretations.
The temporary injunction underscores the ongoing legal and ethical questions surrounding public funding for private sports venues. As the case proceeds, it will likely set a precedent for how states manage unclaimed funds and balance economic development initiatives with constitutional protections for citizens' property rights.
