OKLAHOMA CITY – A handful of conservatives in the Oklahoma Legislature are dangerously close to destroying the independence of the state’s judicial system, officials with the American Civil Liberties Union said Friday.

New legislative attempts to force appellate court justices to retire, gut the state’s Judicial Nominating Commission, and politicize the selection of appellate court justices would eliminate the built in checks and balances of state government, said Brady Henderson, legal director for ACLU Oklahoma.

“What you’re seeing is legislative temper tantrum,” Henderson said. “When members of the legislature don’t like the way a court rules, they file bills like these to get rid of the justices or change the JNC. It’s a problem that is getting worse.”

Henderson said several bills – currently alive for the 2016 legislative session – could do “serious damage” to the state’s appellate judiciary. Those measures include:

  • House Joint Resolution 1006 by Rep. Josh Cockroft, R-Wanette. The resolution would eliminate the current system of appointing justices to the Oklahoma Supreme Court and replace it with one that allows political appointees.
  • Senate Bill 731 by Sen. Ralph Shortey, R-Oklahoma City. The bill would limit members of the appellate judiciary to 12 years in office.
  • Senate Bill 766 by Sen. Anthony Sykes, R-Oklahoma City. The bill would mandate behavior by members of the judiciary and could limit press coverage of judicial activities.
  • Senate Bill 793 by Sen. Anthony Sykes, R-Oklahoma City. This measure would force members of the judiciary to retire when the years they have served on the bench and their age equals the number 80.
  • Senate Joint Resolution 32 by Sen. Anthony Sykes, R-Oklahoma City. The resolution would alter the current system of nominating members of the judiciary and require Senate approval of judicial appointees.
  • House Bill 2214 by Rep. Kevin Calvey, R-Oklahoma City. The bill would alter the composition and authority of the state’s Judicial Nominating Commission.

Calvey, an attorney and member of the Oklahoma Bar Association, said Oklahomans “have to believe elections are bad, and have to believe voters are stupid” to support the current system of nominating and vetting potential judicial appointees.

During legislative hearings at the Capitol this week, Calvey told lawmakers the Oklahoma Supreme Court had, “unjustly and systematically” overturned state anti-abortion laws and helped remove a monument to the Ten Commandments from the Capitol grounds.

“Most lawyers are more liberal than the general population and certainly more liberal than most Oklahomans,” he said.

State Senator Kay Floyd, D-Oklahoma City, countered that legislation such as Calvey’s bill was written by lawmakers who were attempting to intrude into the legal profession.

“I don’t know many professions where you have a mandatory age limit,” Floyd said. “The state isn’t telling my doctor or dentist when to retire.”

Floyd said conservative lawmakers can’t point to any evidence that shows corruption or that members of the Oklahoma’s judiciary aren’t doing their job. “The main proponents of these proposals can’t show any impropriety at all. What’s behind this is that several lawmakers don’t like the court’s rulings.”

She said her research shows that on at least 20 different occasions courts have overturned legislation passed by the Oklahoma Legislature. “We have seen it in numerous courts all the way up to U.S. Supreme Court.”

The new president of the Oklahoma Bar Association agreed. New OBA president Garvin Isaacs told the Associated Press he would spend his term as president ‘fighting for the independence of the judiciary.”

“Some members of the Oklahoma Legislature want to pass a law that allows appellate judges to be elected. We must educate the public about the dangers associated with these current legislative proposals," Isaacs told the AP. "It is time for members of the Oklahoma Bar Association to stand up for a judicial system free from any influences caused by campaign contributions.”

Oklahoma City attorney and historian Bob Burke said Oklahoma’s judiciary has met its responsibility “by proving that it is capable of managing its own house.”

“The judiciary in Oklahoma has also met its civil burden by allowing access to the courts in every conceivable arena of dispute,” Burke wrote in the book, How Bad It Was How Good It Is.

“Even the most ardent critic of our judicial system must admit that the entire slate of judges selected, from district judge to the Supreme Court, has furthered the goal of judicial independence,” he said.

ACLU Oklahoma executive director Ryan Kiesel called on the legislature to step back from their attempts to cripple the judiciary.

“This short-sighted and spiteful effort has more to do with a small number of politicians seeking to build their political careers out of the ashes out of the state’s courts,” he said. “Whatever their motivation, they are playing with fire and should they succeed it will be the people of Oklahoma who get burned.”

Oklahoma’s legislative session continues through May.