Oklahoma Supreme Court justices on Tuesday questioned the timing of the state Republican Party’s challenge of a proposed ballot measure that could open primary elections.
The state’s highest court heard about an hour and a half of oral arguments from both supporters and opponents regarding State Question 836, which proposes overhauling the state’s primary election system. Justices did not immediately issue a ruling.
Vice Chief Justice Dana Kuehn said the Oklahoma Constitution places all political power with the people of the state and that the court has affirmed that it will not violate this provision by dictating what the people get to put on the ballot except in rare occasions.
“There’s no tension until it’s a law or a constitutional change that then someone challenges and brings to us, and then we decide,” she said. “We don’t even know if they’re going to get enough signatures. We don’t know if the gist is okay. We don’t know any of those things. And I just want to understand why you think we should be here right now.”
But Benjamin Sisney, an attorney representing the Oklahoma Republican Party and Ronda Vuillemont-Smith, a former Tulsa GOP chair, who are challenging the measure, argued that the challenge is not premature. He said if the question is allowed to proceed, it would make “radical” changes to state elections. Sisney also questioned the constitutionality of opening the state’s closed primary system to any registered voter.
“It creates the false appearance that candidates are endorsed by or affiliated with the party, co-opting or appropriating the party’s name and platform,” Sisney said. “This is what clearly, manifestly violates the Constitution. The United States Supreme Court has consistently protected the associational rights of political parties.”
The proposed state question, which needs nearly 173,000 signatures to make it onto a future ballot, seeks to open primary elections to all voters. Voters would choose one candidate for each office and the top two voter-getters advance to the general election regardless of political party. Presidential primary elections would be unaffected.
While Oklahoma primaries are currently closed, parties can choose to open them to 466,000 registered independent voters. Only Democrats currently do.
Supporters argue that opening the primaries will allow more people to participate in elections, which are often decided in a primary or primary runoffs.
They argued Tuesday that the state question doesn’t affect the First Amendment rights of political parties at all.
Voters would not be selecting nominees for a political party under open primaries, McCampbell said, but for candidates to advance to a general election.
Tony Stobbe, a proponent for the ballot measure and respondent in the lawsuit, said in a statement following Tuesday’s arguments that this is not a partisan issue.
“Let the people vote,” he said. “That’s all we’re asking. The only reason party insiders are trying to block SQ 836 in court is because they know it has real momentum. Oklahomans are ready for a system where every voter gets to vote in every election — and the political elites are clearly scared of that.”
A spokesperson for the plaintiffs’ counsel declined to comment further on the case.
Justice Travis Jett recused himself from this case. He was sworn in Monday after being appointed in April.
Judge Robert Bell from the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals was appointed as a special justice for this case.
Oklahoma Voice is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Oklahoma Voice maintains editorial independence.
