Oklahoma Supreme Court

Oklahoma Supreme Court
Court Information
Justices: 9
Founded: 1907
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Salary
Associates: $173,469
Judicial Selection
Method: Assisted appointment (Hybrid)
Term: Initial term 1 year; if retained, 6 years
Active justices
Douglas L. Combs, Richard Darby, James Edmondson, Noma D. Gurich, Travis Jett, M. John Kane IV, Dana Kuehn, Dustin P. Rowe, James R. Winchester

Founded in 1907, the Oklahoma Supreme Court is the state's court of last resort for civil matters, while the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals is the court of last resort for criminal matters. The supreme court has nine judgeships. The current chief of the court is Dustin Rowe.

As of July 2025, three judges on the court were appointed by Democratic governors, and six judges were appointed by Republican governors.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court meets in the State Capitol Conference Room and Courtroom in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The court remains in session year-round, unless otherwise noted.

In Oklahoma, state supreme court justices are selected through assisted appointment with a hybrid judicial nominating commission. Justices are appointed by the governor with the assistance of a commission who has no majority of members selected either by the governor or the state Bar Association. There are 10 states that use this selection method. To read more about the assisted appointment of judges, click here.

Jurisdiction

The Oklahoma court system has two courts of last resort. The Oklahoma Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction over "cases at law and in equity," while the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals has appellate jurisdiction over criminal cases.

The supreme court has superintendent control over lower courts in the state. It also adopts rules of operation to govern the state court system and rules of practice to guide attorneys in conduct.

The following text from Article VII, Section 4 of the Oklahoma Constitution covers the jurisdiction of the court:

“	Jurisdiction of Supreme Court - Writs The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court shall be co-extensive with the State and shall extend to all cases at law and in equity; except that the Court of Criminal Appeals shall have exclusive appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases until otherwise provided by statute and in the event there is any conflict as to jurisdiction, the Supreme Court shall determine which court has jurisdiction and such determination shall be final. The original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court shall extend to a general superintendent control over all inferior courts and all Agencies, Commissions and Boards created by law. The Supreme Court, Court of Criminal Appeals, in criminal matters and all other appellate courts shall have power to issue, hear and determine writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, quo warranto, certiorari, prohibition and such other remedial writs as may be provided by law and may exercise such other and further jurisdiction as may be conferred by statute. Each of the Justices or Judges shall have power to issue writs of habeas corpus to any part of the State upon petition by or on behalf of any person held in actual custody and make such writs returnable before himself, or before the Supreme Court, other Appellate Courts, or before any District Court, or judge thereof in the State. The appellate and the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and all other appellate courts shall be invoked in the manner provided by law.	”
—Oklahoma Constitution, Article VII, Section 4

Justices

The table below lists the current justices of the Oklahoma Supreme Court, their political party, when they assumed office, and the appointing governor.

Office	Name	Party	Date assumed office	Appointed by
Oklahoma Supreme Court District 1	M. John Kane IV	Nonpartisan	2019	Kevin Stitt (R)
Oklahoma Supreme Court District 2	Dustin P. Rowe	Nonpartisan	February 24, 2020	Kevin Stitt (R)
Oklahoma Supreme Court District 3	Noma D. Gurich	Nonpartisan	February 15, 2011	Brad Henry (D)
Oklahoma Supreme Court District 4	Travis Jett	Nonpartisan	April 14, 2025	Kevin Stitt (R)
Oklahoma Supreme Court District 5	James R. Winchester	Nonpartisan	2000	Frank Keating (R)
Oklahoma Supreme Court District 6	Dana Kuehn	Nonpartisan	August 2, 2021	Kevin Stitt (R)
Oklahoma Supreme Court District 7	James Edmondson	Nonpartisan	2003	Brad Henry (D)
Oklahoma Supreme Court District 8	Douglas L. Combs	Nonpartisan	2010	Brad Henry (D)
Oklahoma Supreme Court District 9	Richard Darby	Nonpartisan	2018	Mary Fallin (R)

Judicial selection

See also: Judicial selection in Oklahoma

The nine justices of the Oklahoma Supreme Court are selected through the assisted appointment method. Each justice is appointed by the governor from a list of three names compiled by the Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission.

The appointed justice serves an initial term of at least one year, after which they must stand for retention during the next general election. Subsequent terms last six years.

Qualifications

To serve on this court, a justice must be:

• at least 30 years old;
• a qualified voter in his or her respective district for at least one year; and
• licensed to practice for at least five years in the state (or have five years of service as a judge of a court of record).

Chief justice

The chief justice of the court is selected by peer vote, serving in that capacity for two years.

Vacancies

See also: How vacancies are filled in state supreme courts

If a justice retires before the end of his or her term, the vacancy is filled just as it normally would be, with the governor appointing a successor from a list of names provided by the nominating commission. If the appointment is not made within 60 days of the vacancy, the chief justice is responsible for selecting a replacement. The appointed justice then must stand for retention in the next general election after he or she has served one year on the bench to serve out the remainder of his or her predecessor's term.

The map below highlights how vacancies are filled in state supreme courts across the country.

Elections

See also: Oklahoma Supreme Court elections

2024

See also: Oklahoma Supreme Court elections, 2024

The terms of three Oklahoma Supreme Court justices expired on January 12, 2025. The three seats were up for retention election on November 5, 2024. The filing deadline was September 6, 2024.

Candidates and results

Supreme Court

District 3

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 3

Noma D. Gurich was retained to District 3 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 5, 2024 with 50.3% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	50.3	725,064
			No	49.7	717,360
			Total Votes		1,442,424

---

It has been certified. Source

District 4

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 4

Yvonne Kauger was not retained to District 4 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 5, 2024 with 49.8% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
			Yes	49.8	717,063
		✖	No	50.2	723,931
			Total Votes		1,440,994

---

It has been certified. Source

District 7

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 7

James Edmondson was retained to District 7 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 5, 2024 with 51.0% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	51.0	737,462
			No	49.0	708,039
			Total Votes		1,445,501

---

It has been certified. Source

Court of Criminal Appeals

District 1

Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals District 1

William J. Musseman was retained to District 1 of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on November 5, 2024 with 64.3% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	64.3	901,331
			No	35.7	500,528
			Total Votes		1,401,859

---

It has been certified. Source

District 4

Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals District 4

Scott Rowland was retained to District 4 of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on November 5, 2024 with 63.7% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	63.7	889,180
			No	36.3	506,530
			Total Votes		1,395,710

---

It has been certified. Source

District 5

Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals District 5

David B. Lewis was retained to District 5 of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on November 5, 2024 with 59.1% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	59.1	824,173
			No	40.9	570,169
			Total Votes		1,394,342

---

It has been certified. Source

2022

See also: Oklahoma Supreme Court elections, 2022

Candidates and results

Oklahoma Supreme Court

District 2

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 2, Dustin P. Rowe's seat

Dustin P. Rowe was retained to District 2 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 8, 2022 with 64.9% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	64.9	668,080
			No	35.1	361,278
			Total Votes		1,029,358

---

It has been certified. Source

District 5

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 5, James R. Winchester's seat

James R. Winchester was retained to District 5 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 8, 2022 with 63.5% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	63.5	653,330
			No	36.5	375,076
			Total Votes		1,028,406

---

It has been certified. Source

District 6

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 6, Kuehn's seat

Dana Kuehn was retained to District 6 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 8, 2022 with 66.2% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	66.2	680,378
			No	33.8	347,435
			Total Votes		1,027,813

---

It has been certified. Source

District 8

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 8, Douglas L. Combs' seat

Douglas L. Combs was retained to District 8 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 8, 2022 with 61.3% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	61.3	628,893
			No	38.7	397,842
			Total Votes		1,026,735

---

It has been certified. Source

2020

See also: Oklahoma Supreme Court elections, 2020

Supreme Court

District 1

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 1

M. John Kane IV was retained to District 1 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 3, 2020 with 68.9% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	68.9	952,811
			No	31.1	430,580
			Total Votes		1,383,391

---

It has been certified. Source

District 6

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 6

Tom Colbert was retained to District 6 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 3, 2020 with 67.4% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	67.4	937,156
			No	32.6	453,366
			Total Votes		1,390,522

---

It has been certified. Source

District 9

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 9

Richard Darby was retained to District 9 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 3, 2020 with 67.7% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	67.7	932,936
			No	32.3	445,176
			Total Votes		1,378,112

---

It has been certified. Source

Court of Criminal Appeals

District 2

Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals District 2

Rob Hudson was retained to District 2 of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on November 3, 2020 with 68.0% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	68.0	934,578
			No	32.0	440,285
			Total Votes		1,374,863

---

It has been certified. Source

District 3

Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals District 3

Gary Lumpkin was retained to District 3 of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on November 3, 2020 with 66.9% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	66.9	917,375
			No	33.1	453,264
			Total Votes		1,370,639

---

It has been certified. Source

2018

See also: Oklahoma Supreme Court elections, 2018

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 7

James Edmondson was retained to District 7 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 6, 2018 with 59.4% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	59.4	611,334
			No	40.6	417,846
			Total Votes		1,029,180

---

It has been certified. Source

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 4

Yvonne Kauger was retained to District 4 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 6, 2018 with 62.2% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	62.2	637,315
			No	37.8	387,447
			Total Votes		1,024,762

---

It has been certified. Source

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 3

Noma D. Gurich was retained to District 3 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court on November 6, 2018 with 61.6% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	61.6	631,733
			No	38.4	394,373
			Total Votes		1,026,106

---

It has been certified. Source

Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals District 4

Scott Rowland was retained to District 4 of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on November 6, 2018 with 62.3% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	62.3	634,039
			No	37.7	383,100
			Total Votes		1,017,139

---

It has been certified. Source

Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals District 5

David B. Lewis was retained to District 5 of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on November 6, 2018 with 61.8% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	61.8	628,010
			No	38.2	388,505
			Total Votes		1,016,515

---

It has been certified. Source

Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals District 1

Dana Kuehn was retained to District 1 of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on November 6, 2018 with 64.3% of the vote.

			Retention  Vote	%	Votes
		✔	Yes	64.3	656,819
			No	35.7	364,338
			Total Votes		1,021,157

---

It has been certified. Source

Justices who faced retention

■ James R. Winchester
■ Douglas L. Combs

Election results

November 8 general election

James R. Winchester was retained in the Oklahoma Supreme Court District 5 election with 61.33% of the vote.

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 5, 2016
Name	Yes votes
James R. Winchester	61.33%
Source: Oklahoma State Election Board Official Results

Douglas L. Combs was retained in the Oklahoma Supreme Court District 8 election with 58.72% of the vote.

Oklahoma Supreme Court District 8, 2016
Name	Yes votes
Douglas L. Combs	58.72%
Source: Oklahoma State Election Board Official Results

• Election history, 2008-2014 (click to expand)

  2014

  Retention

  Judge	Election Vote
  BoatrightJohn Reif	59.0% A
  MarquezTom Colbert	62.6% A
  MarquezJoseph Watt	59.9% A

  2012

  Candidate	Incumbency	Party	Division	Primary Vote	Election Vote
  CombDouglas L. Combs   A	Yes				A
  EdmondsonJames Edmondson   A	Yes				A
  GurichNoma D. Gurich   A	Yes				A
  KaugerYvonne Kauger   A	Yes				A

  2010

  See also: 2010 State Supreme Court elections

  Incumbent Steven Taylor faced retention and was retained.

  Oklahoma Supreme Court 2010 General election results
  Candidates		Votes	Percent
  Steven Taylor		n/a	64.88%

  2008

  See also: State Supreme Court elections, 2008

  John F. Reif faced retention and was retained.

  Oklahoma Supreme Court 2008 General election results
  Candidates		Votes	Percent
  John F. Reif		n/a	63.2%

  Tom Colbert faced retention and was retained.

  Oklahoma Supreme Court 2008 General election results
  Candidates		Votes	Percent
  Tom Colbert		n/a	66.1%

  Joseph M. Watt faced retention and was retained.

  Oklahoma Supreme Court 2008 General election results
  Candidates		Votes	Percent
  Joseph M. Watt		n/a	63.7%

Appointments

2024

See also: Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice vacancy (December 2024)

On April 14, 2025, Governor Kevin Stitt (R) appointed Travis Jett to the Oklahoma Supreme Court to replace Justice Yvonne Kauger, who retired on December 1, 2024. Her retirement came after a November 2024 election in which the justice was not retained. Kauger, receiving 49.8% of the vote in favor of retention, with 50.2% of voters against. Jett is Gov. Stitt's fourth nominee to the nine-member Oklahoma Supreme Court.

In Oklahoma, state supreme court justices are selected through assisted appointment with a hybrid judicial nominating commission. Justices are appointed by the governor with the assistance of a commission who has no majority of members selected either by the governor or the state Bar Association. There are 10 states that use this selection method. To read more about the assisted appointment of judges, click here.

If a justice retires before the end of his or her term, the vacancy is filled just as it normally would be, with the governor appointing a successor from a list of names provided by the nominating commission. If the appointment is not made within 60 days of the vacancy, the chief justice is responsible for selecting a replacement. The appointed justice then must stand for retention in the next general election after he or she has served one year on the bench to serve out the remainder of his or her predecessor's term.

2021

See also: Oklahoma Supreme Court justice vacancy (February 2021)

Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt (R) appointed Dana Kuehn to the Oklahoma Supreme Court on July 26, 2021. Kuehn succeeded Justice Tom Colbert, who retired on February 1, 2021. Kuehn was Gov. Stitt's third nominee to the nine-member supreme court.

At the time of the vacancy, state supreme court justices were selected by the governor with help from a nominating commission.

2019

Justice Wyrick vacancy

See also: Oklahoma Supreme Court justice vacancy: Patrick Wyrick (April 2019)

Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice Patrick Wyrick vacated his seat on the state supreme court on April 10, 2019, when he received commission to become an Article III federal judge on the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma.

On November 20, 2019, Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) appointed Dustin Rowe to succeed Wyrick on the state supreme court. Rowe was Stitt's second nominee to the nine-member supreme court.

Under Oklahoma state law, the Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) submits three names to the governor, who then appoints one individual to the court. The justice serves until the next general election.

Justice Reif vacancy

See also: Oklahoma Supreme Court justice vacancy: John Reif (April 2019)

Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt (R) appointed John Kane to the Oklahoma Supreme Court on September 17, 2019. Kane replaced former Justice John Reif, who retired April 30, 2019. Reif announced his retirement in a statement on March 15, 2019. Kane was Stitt's first nominee to the nine-member supreme court.

Under Oklahoma state law, in the event of a supreme court vacancy, the Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission (OJNC) submits three names to the governor, who then appoints one to the court. The justice then serves until the next general election after he or she has served one year on the bench. If the governor does not appoint a replacement within 60 days, the chief justice then takes the responsibility.

Caseloads

Oklahoma does not provide caseload statistics for its supreme court.

Analysis

Ballotpedia Courts: Determiners and Dissenters (2021)

See also: Ballotpedia Courts: Determiners and Dissenters

In 2020, Ballotpedia published Ballotpedia Courts: Determiners and Dissenters, a study on how state supreme court justices decided the cases that came before them. Our goal was to determine which justices ruled together most often, which frequently dissented, and which courts featured the most unanimous or contentious decisions.

The study tracked the position taken by each state supreme court justice in every case they decided in 2020, then tallied the number of times the justices on the court ruled together. We identified the following types of justices:

• We considered two justices opinion partners if they frequently concurred or dissented together throughout the year.
• We considered justices a dissenting minority if they frequently opposed decisions together as a -1 minority.
• We considered a group of justices a determining majority if they frequently determined cases by a +1 majority throughout the year.
• We considered a justice a lone dissenter if he or she frequently dissented alone in cases throughout the year.

Summary of cases decided in 2020

• Number of justices: 9
• Number of cases: 112
• Percentage of cases with a unanimous ruling: 65.2% (73)
• Justice most often writing the majority opinion: Justice James Edmondson (11)
• Per curiam decisions: 58
• Concurring opinions: 8
• Justice with most concurring opinions: Justice Dustin Rowe (3)
• Dissenting opinions: 33
• Justice with most dissenting opinions: Justice Dustin Rowe (11)

For the study's full set of findings in Oklahoma, click here.

Ballotpedia Courts: State Partisanship (2020)

See also: Ballotpedia Courts: State Partisanship

Last updated: June 15, 2020

In 2020, Ballotpedia published Ballotpedia Courts: State Partisanship, a study examining the partisan affiliation of all state supreme court justices in the country as of June 15, 2020.

The study presented Confidence Scores that represented our confidence in each justice's degree of partisan affiliation, based on a variety of factors. This was not a measure of where a justice fell on the political or ideological spectrum, but rather a measure of how much confidence we had that a justice was or had been affiliated with a political party. To arrive at confidence scores we analyzed each justice's past partisan activity by collecting data on campaign finance, past political positions, party registration history, as well as other factors. The five categories of Confidence Scores were:

• Strong Democrat
• Mild Democrat
• Indeterminate
• Mild Republican
• Strong Republican

We used the Confidence Scores of each justice to develop a Court Balance Score, which attempted to show the balance among justices with Democratic, Republican, and Indeterminate Confidence Scores on a court. Courts with higher positive Court Balance Scores included justices with higher Republican Confidence Scores, while courts with lower negative Court Balance Scores included justices with higher Democratic Confidence Scores. Courts closest to zero either had justices with conflicting partisanship or justices with Indeterminate Confidence Scores.

Oklahoma had a Court Balance Score of 1.43, indicating Republican control of the court. In total, the study found that there were 15 states with Democrat-controlled courts, 27 states with Republican-controlled courts, and eight states with Split courts. The map below shows the court balance score of each state.

Bonica and Woodruff campaign finance scores (2012)

See also: Bonica and Woodruff campaign finance scores of state supreme court justices, 2012

In October 2012, political science professors Adam Bonica and Michael Woodruff of Stanford University attempted to determine the partisan outlook of state supreme court justices in their paper, "State Supreme Court Ideology and 'New Style' Judicial Campaigns." A score above 0 indicated a more conservative-leaning ideology while scores below 0 were more liberal. The state Supreme Court of Oklahoma was given a campaign finance score (CFscore), which was calculated for judges in October 2012. At that time, Oklahoma received a score of 0.33. Based on the justices selected, Oklahoma was the 14th most conservative court. The study was based on data from campaign contributions by judges themselves, the partisan leaning of contributors to the judges, or—in the absence of elections—the ideology of the appointing body (governor or legislature). This study was not a definitive label of a justice but rather an academic gauge of various factors.

Noteworthy cases

The following are noteworthy cases heard before the Oklahoma Supreme Court. For a full list of opinions published by the court, click here. Know of a case we should cover here? Let us know by emailing us.

Before the U.S. Supreme Court

This section focuses on cases the U.S. Supreme Court heard that originated in this court. To suggest cases we should cover here, email us.

2024-2025 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2024-2025

The following case was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2024-2025 term.

2024-2025 Oklahoma Supreme Court
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond	per curiam	affirmed	4-4

• Bible instruction mandated at public schools	Click for summary→
On June 27, 2024, Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters ordered public schools to incorporate the Bible into lessons for grades 5 through 12. Walters told the Associated Press, "The Bible is an indispensable historical and cultural touchstone...without basic knowledge of it, Oklahoma students are unable to properly contextualize the foundation of our nation, which is why Oklahoma educational standards provide for its instruction.” On October 17, 2024, a group of Oklahoma parents of public school students, teachers, and ministers filed a lawsuit with the Oklahoma Supreme Court, asking the court to stop Walters from spending $3 million to purchase Bibles to support the instruction mandate. The suit alleges that the mandate violates the Oklahoma Constitution because it involves spending public money to support religion, and favors one religion over another by requiring the use of a Protestant version of the Bible. It also alleges that Walters and the state Board of Education do not have the authority to require the use of specific instructional materials. Of the suit, plaintiff Erika Wright told the Associated Press, “As parents, my husband and I have sole responsibility to decide how and when our children learn about the Bible and religious teachings...it is not the role of any politician or public school official to intervene in these personal matters." As of November 15, 2024, a trial date had not been set for the case.

• Ten Commandments monument banned at state capitol	Click for summary→
The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that a monument depicting the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the Oklahoma Capitol must be removed. The court said the monument violates the state constitution's ban on using public property to benefit religion. By a 7-2 majority, the court said the commandments are “obviously religious in nature and are an integral part of the Jewish and Christian faiths.” The decision overturns a district court judge's ruling in favor of the monument. The six-foot tall granite monument was privately funded by a Republican legislator. In response to the supreme court's ruling, several Republican legislators called for the impeachment of the seven justices who ruled against it. Attorney General Scott Pruitt, also a Republican, argued that the monument was historical rather than religious, and that it was nearly identical to a Texas monument that was found constitutional by the United States Supreme Court. The Oklahoma Supreme Court said that its decision was based on the Oklahoma Constitution, not the United States Constitution. Pruitt asked for a rehearing and said that the monument would stay until the court considers that request. He also called for a repeal of the provision in the constitution prohibiting the use of public funds for religion. He said in a statement: “ Quite simply, the Oklahoma Supreme Court got it wrong. The court completely ignored the profound historical impact of the Ten Commandments on the foundation of Western law. ” —Scott Pruitt, In response, Ryan Kiesel, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma, which represented the plaintiffs in the case, said: “ I think the idea that you go about amending the constitution every time you lose a court battle is a dangerous precedent for anyone to engage in, but in particular for the state's highest attorney to do so. ” —Ryan Kiesel,

• Abortion decision clarified prior to U.S. Supreme Court ruling	Click for summary→
The Oklahoma Supreme Court, at the request of the U.S. Supreme Court, clarified a previous ruling striking down a 2011 abortion law. The U.S. Supreme Court tentatively agreed to hear an appeal of a lawsuit against HB 1970, an Oklahoma law that banned drug-induced abortions, in June 2014. However, the justices first asked the Oklahoma high court to clarify whether or not the law applied to certain drugs that are known to be used for abortions. The Oklahoma Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, decided that the law did, in fact, apply to these drugs. The opinion stated: "HB 1970 effectively bans all medication abortions." The lawsuit, titled Terry Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice was brought by abortion providers who argued that HB 1970 placed an undue burden on women seeking an abortion. The law required abortion providers to comply with FDA-approved restrictions which were set in 2000. That year, the FDA approved the use of the drug RU-486 for abortions. However, since then, other drugs and innovations were developed which, abortion providers argued, provided better methods for performing terminating pregnancies. The lawsuit pointed out that the Oklahoma law limited abortions to the method prescribed by the FDA in 2000, rather than allowing for the use of approved drugs with new, non-approved protocols. According to a statistic offered by the abortion providers, a large majority of drug-induced abortions followed different protocols than those approved by the FDA in 2000. Regarding these issues, the court ruled: "FDA-approved labeling is not intended to limit or interfere with the practice of medicine nor to preclude physicians from using their best judgment in the interest of the patient." Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R) disagreed with the court's ruling and said that that law was meant to protect women from "harmful outcomes." Regarding the state supreme court justices, he said, "We believe they have erred yet again by interpreting the law more broadly than the Legislature intended." On the other side of the issue was the The Center for Reproductive Rights, who praised the court's decision for striking down a law that they said "was designed to not only rob women of the safe, legal, and effective option of medication to end a pregnancy at its earliest stages, but also threaten the health, lives, and future fertility of women suffering from ectopic pregnancies." In November 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States dismissed Oklahoma's appeal.

Ethics

The Oklahoma Code of Judicial Conduct sets forth ethical guidelines and principles for the conduct of judges and judicial candidates in Oklahoma. It is composed of four canons:

• Canon 1: "A judge shall uphold and promote the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety."
• Canon 2: "A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially, competently, and diligently."
• Canon 3: "A judge shall conduct the judge’s personal and extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflict with the obligations of judicial office."
• Canon 4: "A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality of the judiciary."

The full text of the Oklahoma Code of Judicial Conduct can be found here.

Removal of judges

Judges in Oklahoma may be removed in one of two ways:

• By the council on judicial complaints, which receives and investigates allegations of judicial misconduct and, when appropriate, can recommend the removal of a judge from office to the court on the judiciary.
• Impeachment by the house of representatives, plus conviction by two-thirds of the senate.

Noteworthy events

Judicial district reorganization

On April 25, 2019, Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) signed HB 2366, which abolished the nine existing Oklahoma Supreme Court judicial districts and created a new system where five justices would represent the state's five congressional districts and four would represent the state at-large. The changes were set to go into place in 2020 and would not affect any of the sitting justices. The law made similar changes to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, aligning its five districts with the state's five congressional districts.

The previous judicial map was drawn in 1967 and was designed to ensure regional diversity on the state supreme court. At the time of the map change, nearly 70 percent of Oklahoma lawyers lived in the two districts that covered Oklahoma and Tulsa Counties, and potential justices had to live in the district they represented. University of Oklahoma political scientist Keith Gaddie said, “Most of the talent pool that's available to serve on the high court is rendered ineligible due to geography.”

The Enid News & Eagle published an op-ed opposing the legislation. It said, “We believe House Bill 2366 will ultimately have a negative impact on Garfield County and, ultimately, rural Oklahoma. Eventually, the Supreme Court members likely will all be from the Tulsa or Oklahoma City metro areas. The perspective of the county seat lawyer or a rural judge will be lost forever.”

The Oklahoman editorial board supported the change in an editorial. It said, “[The new map] would produce a deeper pool of candidates from which to choose. All of Oklahoma would benefit from that.”

History of the court

The Oklahoma State Capitol in Oklahoma City, which houses the Oklahoma Supreme Court

Oklahoma was initially part of the informal Indian Territory, a region encompassing Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, and part of Iowa, created in 1834 and originally envisioned for housing Native American tribes who were forcibly moved into the territory, including the Choctaw, Creek, Seminole, Cherokee, and Chickasaw. As white settlers moved in, the federal government began to assume more control of the territory. A United States district court was established in Arkansas in 1851 that included the Indian Territory. One judge was appointed by the U.S. president, and in 1897 a second judge was added. In March 1889, a law passed by Congress established a federal court system based in Muskogee, that assumed judicial authority and jurisdiction over the region. The 1889 legislation created three judicial divisions and required two court terms to be held in each division each year.

In 1890 an organic statute created the territory of Oklahoma as the Indian Territory. Three branches of government were set up, including a judiciary with a three-member supreme court.

Oklahoma achieved statehood in 1907, and with it, the Oklahoma Constitution was adopted, and provided for a judiciary. The 1907 constitution is still in effect. The supreme court consisted of five justices with appellate jurisdiction and original jurisdiction in superintending lower courts. Justices were nominated from districts, but elected in statewide partisan elections by voters for terms of six years. In 1908, Chief Justice Robert Williams (Oklahoma) wrote "The supreme court has remained almost continuously in session since the date of its organization. So many intricate questions for judicial determination arising under the peculiar conditions under which this state came into the union, being the only state which was ever admitted covering territory embracing an organized territorial form of government…and also a semi-territorial form of government…embraced by the Five Civilized Tribes, which formerly existed as five separate governments."

Uniquely, the state had two courts of last resort, the supreme court, which had final jurisdiction over civil matters, and the court of criminal appeals, with final jurisdiction over criminal matters. The legislature was given the power to dissolve any court in the state at any time, except for the supreme court. Judicial power was also vested in a court of impeachment, made up of state senators, and the court on the judiciary. The legislature played a dominant role in the state's judiciary until 1967.

The Oklahoma Judicial Reform, State Question 448 (July 1967) constitutional amendment made major reforms to the judiciary by reorganizing the judicial system; providing for districts; abolishing certain courts; and providing for justice of the peace courts. Judicial reforms also removed partisan judicial elections from the supreme court, providing for retention elections instead. The amendment provided for nine supreme court justices. The judicial reforms came out of a judicial scandal in the 1960s where three justices of the supreme court were forced out of office. The amendment also created an administrative director of the courts, supervised by the chief justice, to serve as the administrative director of the courts. The judiciary continues to have two courts of last resort.

Courts in Oklahoma

See also: Courts in Oklahoma

In Oklahoma, there are three federal district courts, a state supreme court, court of criminal appeals, court of civil appeals, and trial courts with both general and limited jurisdiction. These courts serve different purposes, which are outlined in the sections below.

Click a link for information about that court type.

• Federal courts
• State supreme court
• State court of appeals
• Trial courts

The image below depicts the flow of cases through Oklahoma's state court system. Cases typically originate in the trial courts and can be appealed to courts higher up in the system.

The structure of Oklahoma's state court system.

Party control of Oklahoma state government

A state government trifecta is a term that describes single-party government, when one political party holds the governor's office and has majorities in both chambers of the legislature in a state government. A state supreme court plays a role in the checks and balances system of a state government.

Oklahoma has a Republican trifecta. The Republican Party controls the office of governor and both chambers of the state legislature.

Oklahoma Party Control: 1992-2024
Five years of Democratic trifectas  •  Fourteen years of Republican trifectas
Scroll left and right on the table below to view more years.

Year	92	93	94	95	96	97	98	99	00	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24
Governor	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R
Senate	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	S	S	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R
House	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R

See also

Oklahoma	Judicial Selection	More Courts
Courts in Oklahoma Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals Oklahoma Supreme Court	Elections: 2025 • 2024 • 2023 • 2022 • 2021 • 2020 • 2019 • 2018 • 2017 Gubernatorial appointments Judicial selection in Oklahoma	Federal courts State courts Local courts

External links

• Oklahoma State Courts Network