National Review: Oklahomans Want Judicial Elections
Oklahomans Want Judicial Elections
by CARRIE SEVERINO
Two weeks ago the Oklahoma legislature invited me to testify on the topic of judicial selection reform. (See my testimony here.) The state is currently one of twelve that use the so-called “Missouri Plan,” the commission-based method of selecting judges that empowers liberal lawyers to pack courts with judges who share their liberal legal philosophy.
We have chronicled the terrible impact this method of selection has had on courts across the country, but the situation in Oklahoma seems to have grown especially dire over the last several years. The Oklahoma Supreme Court has, on indefensible grounds, halted laws designed to assist in the prosecution of child rapists, blocked laws designed to make abortion clinics safer, crippled tort reform, and ordered removal of a Ten Commandment monument from the state Capitol grounds.
Oklahoma is a conservative state, so, not surprisingly, the state supreme court’s liberal decisions have galvanized support for reform. A recent Federalist Society poll shows that nearly 80% of Oklahomans now support a constitutional amendment to replace the current selection process with direct, contested elections in which the people of Oklahoma choose their own judges. Prominent organizations have joined the reform effort at the local and national level, including Oklahomans for Life, Americans for Prosperity, and my own organization, the Judicial Crisis Network.