OKLAHOMA CITY — Television ads surrounding the Oklahoma governor’s race attacking Attorney General Gentner Drummond over alleged support for LGBTQ-related programming center largely on state actions and certifications that predated his tenure as Oklahoma attorney general, according to public records and reporting tied to the controversy.
The issue has emerged as a central line of attack in Oklahoma’s Republican gubernatorial primary, with Gov. Kevin Stitt and allied outside groups amplifying claims linking Drummond to Diversity Center of Oklahoma and related programming criticized by social conservatives.
But a review of publicly available records shows the timeline behind the controversy is more complicated than the ads suggest.
Former Attorney General Mike Hunter resigned in 2021 amid allegations of inappropriate conduct.
Stitt subsequently appointed Tulsa attorney John O’Connor to serve as attorney general.
According to reporting by the Tulsa World, a temporary certification tied to Diversity Center of Oklahoma was dated Nov. 15, 2021 — during O’Connor’s tenure as attorney general and more than a year before Drummond took office.
Drummond defeated O’Connor in the 2022 Republican primary and was sworn into office in January 2023.
The chronology matters politically because the attacks frame the controversy as something tied directly to Drummond, while available records indicate at least some of the underlying authorization process began before he assumed office.
What remains less clear is the exact legal significance of the certification, what authority it conferred and whether taxpayer money directly flowed to Diversity Center of Oklahoma during Drummond’s tenure.
The Tulsa World reported attorney Andrew Woodson, representing interests tied to School Freedom Fund Oklahoma, argued Drummond could have acted more quickly after taking office to revoke the certification or authorization connected to the organization.
Publicly available records do not currently show evidence that Drummond personally approved grants tied to the organization or directly authorized taxpayer spending for the activities highlighted in the ads.
At the same time, critics argue Drummond inherited oversight responsibility for the attorney general’s office and therefore bears responsibility for actions taken — or not taken — after assuming office.
The dispute illustrates a broader political strategy increasingly common in Republican primaries nationally, where outside groups use culturally polarizing issues to define opponents early and force them into defensive fights over social issues rather than traditional policy debates.
In Oklahoma’s governor’s race, the attacks appear aimed at culturally branding Drummond with GOP primary voters before he can fully consolidate support among establishment conservatives and traditional Republican donors.
The controversy escalated further this week when Drummond sued Stitt and School Freedom Fund Oklahoma in Osage County District Court, alleging the ads and related public attacks amounted to a coordinated “smear campaign” built on false claims.
That lawsuit remains pending.
