Oklahoma’s Supreme Court has rejected an attempt to create new business-focused state courts, but supporters of the proposed reform are hopeful they can bring new legislation forward that fixes unconstitutional parts of the bill.
A five-justice majority of the Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down Senate Bill 632 on Tuesday, Oct. 7.
The bill would have created two business courts headquartered in Tulsa and Oklahoma City, staffed by judges appointed by the governor. It was adopted by the Legislature and signed by the governor in May.
A group of attorneys quickly challenged the bill’s method of selecting judges and said the bill created an unconstitutional barrier to the court in the form of a $1,500 filing fee. After the ruling, the petitioner’s attorney told The Oklahoman he was glad to see the court struck down a direct attempt to bypass the typical way that Oklahomans pick their judges.
The Supreme Court’s major fault with the bill is that business court judges would be appointed by the governor from a list of three names supplied by the Oklahoma House speaker. Then, the state Senate would get a chance to approve or reject the appointment.
Supreme Court Justice Noma Gurich, joined by four other justices, wrote in her opinion that the bill technically creates new district judges – and the Oklahoma Constitution requires district judges to be elected.
“Although a new court may have been the desired intent of SB 632, the only accurate reading of (the bill) is that it instead creates business court divisions within Oklahoma County and Tulsa County District Courts,” Gurich wrote. “As such, the ‘business court’ judges are district judges and must therefore be (elected).”
Ruling contrasts with Oklahoma reputation, Gov. Kevin Stitt says
Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt was the main proponent of the bill. A day after the justices revealed their opinion, he said the ruling contrasts with Oklahoma’s reputation as “the most business-friendly state.”
“The dissenting justices had the case right, and while the outcome is disappointing, it will not deter us from our mission to make Oklahoma top 10 in everything we do,” Stitt said.
Chief Justice Dustin P. Rowe didn’t join the majority’s full opinion, but he agreed that judge seats created by the bill would have to be filled by an election.
“This method of judicial selection directly circumvents the constitutional requirement that judicial officers be elected by the people,” Rowe wrote in his own separate and nonbinding opinion.
Justices Dana Kuehn and Travis Jett both disagreed with the court’s decision to even hear the case, writing separately that the district court should have reviewed the facts of the case first.
Rowe, Kuehn and Jett are three of the four justices appointed to the bench by Stitt. The governor’s fourth appointee, Justice John Kane, did not vote in the ruling.
The court didn’t explain why Kane did not to participate, but legislation in 2024 required Kane, who was serving a term as chief justice, to appoint a representative to a state task force on the business courts proposal. The task force eventually laid the framework for Senate Bill 632 the following year.
Could business courts still be implemented in Oklahoma?
If lawmakers and the governor want to try again, they could introduce legislation in 2026 that addresses the court’s concerns. Former lawmaker and task force chair Jon Echols said he expects the task force members to discuss the ruling when they meet again in November. Echols is running for the Republican nomination for attorney general in 2026.
“I think the task force and I are very interested in creating constitutionally sound business courts,” Echols told The Oklahoman. “This is not a new concept. Roughly half of states have some form of business court. Oklahoma needs to modernize its system and become the best state in the nation for business, and business courts are part of that transformation.”
The legal challenge to Senate Bill 632 began when group of attorneys petitioned the Oklahoma Supreme Court in June, arguing that the new law was unconstitutional.
Oklahoma City attorney Bob Burke, who presented the case on behalf of plaintiffs Joe E. White, Jr. and Jason Waddell, said that he realized early on that several parts of the bill were unconstitutional.
“It appears to me that (the Oklahoma Supreme Court) hung their hat on the fact that, first of all, the method of selecting judges is 100% contrary to the constitution, and the rest of the bill couldn’t operate without that. So they found the entire act unconstitutional,” Burke said.
By having just the speaker of the Oklahoma House, governor and Senate deciding who can be a business court judge, Burke said the bill added politics into the selection of district judges that handle the vast majority of lawsuits.
Other issues raised by opponents of the bill included the $1,500 filing fee and the hardship on parties who live outside of Oklahoma and Tulsa counties, where the courts would be based.
This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: Why the Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down business courts proposal
