What's Happening?
Former Republican lawmaker Mark McBride has filed a lawsuit with the Oklahoma Supreme Court to challenge Governor Kevin Stitt's executive proclamation calling for a special statewide election on April 6, 2027. The election would ask voters to consider
State Question 848, which proposes allowing legislators to hold a constitutional convention to alter, revise, amend, or propose a new state constitution. McBride and his legal team argue that only the Legislature has the authority to submit such a referendum to the people, not the Governor. This position is supported by the Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond's office and former Attorney General Drew Edmondson, who have also stated that Stitt's action is unconstitutional. Governor Stitt, however, maintains that his action fulfills a state law requiring voters to have the opportunity to request a constitutional convention every 20 years, noting it has been 56 years since the last such opportunity.
Why It's Important?
This legal challenge is significant as it directly questions the separation of powers within Oklahoma's state government and the extent of the Governor's executive authority. If the Supreme Court sides with McBride, it would reaffirm the Legislature's exclusive role in initiating constitutional convention referendums, potentially setting a precedent for future actions by the executive branch. Conversely, if Governor Stitt's action is upheld, it could expand the Governor's power in initiating significant constitutional changes. The outcome will determine the legitimate process for amending or revising the state's foundational document, impacting how future constitutional questions are brought before Oklahoma voters. The dispute also highlights ongoing tensions between Governor Stitt and other state officials, including the Attorney General, regarding governmental authority.
What's Next?
The Oklahoma Supreme Court will now need to determine whether to assume original jurisdiction over the case. McBride is requesting that the court temporarily halt preparations for the April 2027 special election and ultimately declare Governor Stitt's executive proclamation and accompanying executive order unconstitutional. The court's decision will clarify the constitutional authority regarding calls for a constitutional convention. If the court rules in favor of McBride, the special election for State Question 848 would likely be canceled, and any future efforts to hold a constitutional convention would need to originate from the Legislature. If the court upholds Stitt's authority, preparations for the April 2027 vote will proceed, allowing Oklahomans to decide on the convention. Governor Stitt's term ends before the scheduled election, meaning the legal battle will likely conclude before he leaves office, but the vote itself would occur under a new administration.
Beyond the Headlines
The underlying issue of a constitutional convention carries profound implications for Oklahoma's future. A convention could lead to sweeping changes to the state's constitution, affecting various aspects of governance, public policy, and individual rights. The debate over who has the authority to initiate such a process reflects a broader concern about democratic checks and balances and the potential for a 'handful of people' to influence the state's foundational document, as expressed by McBride's attorney, Bob Burke. The lawsuit does not aim to prevent a constitutional convention itself, but rather to ensure that the process adheres strictly to constitutional provisions, emphasizing due process and equal treatment for all Oklahomans in determining their state's future legal framework. The outcome could influence how other states interpret similar constitutional provisions regarding conventions.
