State Question 845 would allow attorneys to serve in all 15 positions on the Judicial Nominating Commission, remove political-party limits and permit consecutive terms.
OKLAHOMA CITY — Oklahoma voters will decide Nov. 3 whether to rewrite the rules governing the people who help screen candidates for the state’s highest courts.
State Question 845 would retain Oklahoma’s 15-member Judicial Nominating Commission and its role in sending judicial nominees to the governor. The measure would change who may serve on the commission and for how long.
The central dispute is whether the current limits help keep political and professional influence in check or unnecessarily narrow the pool of eligible commissioners.
What SQ 845 would change
The current commission includes six nonlawyers appointed by the governor, six attorneys elected by active members of the Oklahoma Bar Association and three nonlawyer members selected by the House speaker, Senate president pro tempore and other commissioners.
SQ 845 would make four main changes. The official ballot title says the measure would have no fiscal impact.
- Attorneys: The nine positions now reserved for nonlawyers also would become open to attorneys. The current restriction involving immediate family members who practice law would end. Because the six bar-elected positions would continue to be held by lawyers, the commission could include anywhere from six to 15 attorneys.
- Political affiliation: The governor currently may appoint no more than three members from one political party. No more than two of the three at-large members may share a party affiliation. SQ 845 would end those limits.
- Terms: Commissioners could serve consecutive terms for as long as 12 years. Members in six-year positions could serve two consecutive terms, while the three at-large members could receive successive two-year terms.
- Geography: The commission would begin using Oklahoma’s congressional districts as they exist when members are appointed or elected. The current system uses the six congressional districts that existed in 1967, although Oklahoma now has five.
The changes would take effect as existing terms expire or commission seats become vacant.
The case for and against
Supporters describe the proposal as a modernization of rules written around a congressional map nearly 60 years old. They argue that qualified candidates should not be disqualified because they are attorneys, have lawyers in their families or share a party affiliation with other commissioners.
During Senate debate, Sen. Todd Gollihare, the Senate author, argued that the state’s political majority should have greater influence over a judicial branch capable of overturning actions by elected officials.
Critics see the current restrictions as safeguards that distribute influence. They note that SQ 845 would allow lawyers to occupy all 15 seats and remove party-affiliation limits from the governor-appointed and at-large positions.
The disagreement is whether broader eligibility would give appointing officials needed flexibility or remove deliberate limits intended to keep political and professional influence from becoming too concentrated.
What would stay the same
The commission would remain a 15-member body with six governor-appointed positions, six positions filled through the Oklahoma Bar Association process and three at-large positions.
Its central function also would stay the same. The commission would continue screening applicants for vacancies on the Oklahoma Supreme Court, Court of Criminal Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals. It also would continue handling district and associate district judge vacancies that occur between elections.
The commission would send three nominees to the governor, who would have 60 days to appoint one. Appointed appellate judges would continue appearing before voters in retention elections.
Why Oklahoma created the commission
Oklahoma originally elected its appellate judges on partisan ballots. Reform proposals had circulated for years, but a Supreme Court bribery scandal in the 1960s gave the movement new urgency.
Former Justice N.S. Corn admitted accepting bribes in some cases and described an arrangement in which campaign money was exchanged for judicial votes. Justice Earl Welch resigned during the scandal, and Justice N.B. Johnson was impeached and removed from office.
Voters approved State Question 447 in 1967, creating the Judicial Nominating Commission and establishing appointment followed by retention elections for the state’s appellate judges. Voters expanded the commission from 13 to 15 members in 2010.
The takeaway
SQ 845 would preserve Oklahoma’s commission-based judicial appointment system while broadening eligibility, ending party-balance requirements, updating its geographic districts and allowing commissioners to serve as long as 12 consecutive years.
The Legislature placed the measure on the ballot through House Joint Resolution 1024. Rep. Anthony Moore, R-Clinton, was the principal House author, and Gollihare was the principal Senate author.
A yes vote would adopt the new membership and term rules. A no vote would keep the existing rules.
