Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission, State Question 752 (2010)
|
|
|
The Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission Amendment, also known as State Question 752, was on the November 2, 2010 ballot in Oklahoma as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved. The measure added two at-large members to the Judicial Nomination Commission. Senators Patrick Anderson and Clark Jolley and Representative Daniel Sullivan authored the bill.[1][2]
Aftermath
The measure took effect on November 9, 2010, and on that day, Judicial Nominating Commission chairman Allen Smallwood requested a legal opinion from the Oklahoma Attorney General to figure out how the commission should go forward since the measure passed. Smallwood stated that some could argue that the commission's decisions are not valid until two new members are added, and also brought up the question of whether three current members on the commission can continue their duties since they are married to lawyers. According to Smallwood, "The last thing we want to do is go through the selection process and have someone question whether our membership is legal."[3]
Election results
- See also: 2010 ballot measure election results
Official election results of the measure follow:
| Oklahoma State Question 752 (2010) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| 606,805 | 62.83% | |||
| No | 358,925 | 37.17% | ||
Election results via: Oklahoma Secretary of State
Text of amendment
Ballot title
The ballot title that voters saw on the ballot read:[4]
| This measure amends a section of the Oklahoma Constitution. It amends Section 3 of Article 7-B. The measure deals with the Judicial Nomination Commission. This Commission selects nominees to be appointed judges or justices, when a vacancy occurs. The Commission selects three, sometimes four, qualified nominees. The Governor must appoint one of the nominees.
The amendment adds two at-large members to the Commission. At-large members can come from any Oklahoma congressional district. The Senate President Pro Tempore appoints one of the new at-large members. The Speaker of the House of Representatives appoints the other. At-large members can not be lawyers. Nor can they have a lawyer in their immediate family. Nor can more than two at-large members be from the same political party. Six non-at-large members are appointed by the Governor. They cannot be Oklahoma lawyers. The measure adds a new qualification for non-lawyer members. They can not have a lawyer from any state in their immediate family. Each congressional district must have at least one non-lawyer member. Six lawyer members are elected by members of the Oklahoma Bar Association. Each congressional district must have a least one lawyer member. Shall the proposal be approved? For the proposal Yes: __________ Against the proposal No: __________ |
Summary
The summary of the measure read:[4]
| “ | This measure amends a section of the Oklahoma Constitution. It amends Section 3 of Article 7-B. The measure deals with the Judicial Nomination Commission. This Commission selects nominees to be appointed judges or justices, when a vacancy occurs. The Commission selects three, sometimes four, qualified nominees. The Governor must appoint one of the nominees.
The amendment adds two at-large members to the Commission. At-large members can come from any Oklahoma congressional district. The Senate President Pro Tempore appoints one of the new at-large members. The Speaker of the House of Representatives appoints the other. At-large members can not be lawyers. Nor can they have a lawyer in their immediate family. Nor can more than two at-large members be from the same political party. Six non-at-large members are appointed by the Governor. They cannot be Oklahoma lawyers. The measure adds a new qualification for non-lawyer members. They can not have a lawyer from any state in their immediate family. Each congressional district must have at least one non-lawyer member. Six lawyer members are elected by members of the Oklahoma Bar Association. Each congressional district must have a least one lawyer member. [5] |
” |
Constitutional changes
SQ 752 was proposed to amend Article VII-B, Section 3 of the Oklahoma Constitution.[2]
Support
- There was no known supporting campaign for the measure.
Opposition
- There was no known opposing campaign against the measure.
Media endorsements
Support
- The Oklahoman recommended a 'yes' vote on the measure, stating, "The measure also would prohibit any of the gubernatorial or legislative appointments from having immediate family members who are lawyers and prohibits more than two at-large members from the same political party. The proposal at least serves to dilute the influence of lawyers on the selection list while preserving the governor as the ultimate authority."[6]
- The Enid News and Eagle recommended a 'yes' vote on the measure, stating, "This measure expands the Judicial Nominating Commission, a body which narrows the list of potential judges for vacancies on the Supreme Court, Court of Criminal Appeals and Court of Appeals, district and associate district judges and the Worker’s Compensation Court, with the governor making the final decision. This adds two more members who are not lawyers to the commission, with these new members being appointed by the House and Senate legislative leaders."[7]
- The Oklahoma Daily was for the measure, stating, "If passed, this measure would add two members to the Judicial Nominating Commission, which helps the governor choose potential judges to fill empty seats on a number of state courts. This will weaken the influence of lawyers — often appointed by friends and family — on the commission. Sounds good to us."[8]
- The Tulsa Beacon made recommendations for all the state questions on the ballot, and recommended a 'yes' vote on the measure.[9]
Opposition
- The Tulsa World was against the measure, recommending a 'no' vote: "The measure’s impact is very modest, but it would shift some patronage from the Oklahoma Bar Association to the leaders of the state Legislature. The proposal would needlessly tinker with a system that has served the state well and it should be rejected."[10]
Polls
- See also: Polls, 2010 ballot measures
- In one of the last polls taken by SoonerPoll before the general election, the results showed support of the measure by those surveyed. The poll included 384 Democrats, 345 Republicans and 24 independents.[11]
| Date of Poll | Pollster | In favor | Opposed | Undecided | Number polled |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| October 18-23, 2010 | SoonerPoll.com | 45% | 30% | 25% | 753 |
Litigation
An attempt to block Governor of Oklahoma Brad Henry from appointing a new state Supreme Court Justice to replace the late Marian Opala was rejected by the Oklahoma Supreme Court on January 3, 2011. The legal challenge, filed by State Senator Clark Jolley, also sought to make sure that the Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission not act on the vacancy in the high court until the commission was formed the way SQ 752's provisions intended. The Oklahoma Supreme Court rejected the attempt to block the appointment on February 15,2011.[12][13]
Path to the ballot
The Oklahoma State Legislature can approve a proposed amendment by a majority vote. (However, if the state legislature wants the proposed amendment to go on a special election ballot, it has to approve the amendment by a 2/3rds vote.) Oklahoma is one of ten states that allows a referred amendment to go on the ballot after a majority vote in one session of the state's legislature.
See also
- Oklahoma 2010 ballot measures
- 2010 ballot measures
- List of Oklahoma ballot measures
- History of Initiative & Referendum in Oklahoma
External links
- Oklahoma Secretary of State
- Oklahoma State Question 752
- Oklahoma State Questions Booklet for the November 2, 2010 election
- Controversy continues over membership of Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission
Footnotes
- ↑ Oklahoma Secretary of State, "State Questions," accessed December 3, 2014
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Legislative Briefs
- ↑ The Oklahoman, "Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission asks for opinion on how it should proceed when SQ 752 takes effect today," November 9, 2010
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Oklahoma Secretary of State, "State Question 752," accessed December 3, 2014
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ The Oklahoman, "Our SQ choices," October 17, 2010
- ↑ The Enid News and Eagle, "Our take on the state questions," October 18, 2010
- ↑ The Oklahoma Daily, "OUR VIEW: State Questions 747 and 752," October 29, 2010
- ↑ Tulsa Beacon, "Tulsa Beacon voting endorsements for the Nov. 2 Election," October 28, 2010
- ↑ Tulsa World, "State questions," October 24, 2010
- ↑ Tulsa World, "SQ 744 opposition rises," October 30, 2010
- ↑ The Oklahoman, "Attempt fails to block governor from making high court pick," January 7, 2011
- ↑ KSWO, "Okla Supreme Court denies constitutional challenge," February 15, 2011
State of Oklahoma Oklahoma City (capital) | |
|---|---|
| Elections |
Oklahoma elections in 2021 | Voting in Oklahoma | What's on my ballot? | Elections calendar | Election governance | Ballot access for candidates | Ballot access for parties | Campaign finance requirements | Redistricting |
| Ballot measures |
List of Oklahoma ballot measures | Local measures | Ballot measure laws | Campaign finance requirements |
| Government |
Who represents me? | Congressional delegation | State executives | State legislature | State Senate | House of Representatives | 2021 legislative session | Largest counties | Largest cities | School districts in Oklahoma | State constitution |
| Judiciary |
Courts in Oklahoma | Judicial Selection | Federal courts | Supreme Court | Court of Criminal Appeals | Court of Civil Appeals | District Courts | Workers' Compensation Court |
| Public Policy |
Budget and finances | Energy | Environment | Financial regulation | Healthcare | Immigration | Public education | Public pensions | Taxes |