A proposed law giving the governor more power to appoint judges to Oklahoma’s highest court was discussed in a state House committee Wednesday.
Although Senate Joint Resolution 43 would see state Supreme Court justices and other judges appointed by the governor andconfirmed by the legislature, it was heard in a committee dedicated to banking.
Rep. Chad Caldwell (R-Enid) asked author and Chairman of the Banking, Financial Services and Pensions Committee Rep. Mark Lepak (R-Claremore) about the discrepancy. Lepak said he couldn’t explain it.
“As you know, our leadership team can assign these things to wherever they want. I don’t know if . . . someone thought they were doing me a favor or if they were not wanting to do me a favor, but no, I can’t comment,” said Lepak.
And yet the issue is about transparency. Proponents of SJR 43 say more light is needed on the current process used to appoint judges. That process involves a commission of 15 volunteers appointed by different bodies who vet judgeship applicants.
Lepak, whose wife is on the Judicial Nominating Commission, said under his proposed system the JNC would be abolished and the governor would interview candidates, but those interviews also wouldn’t be public since the governor would want his candidate to be seen in a favorable light.
“When you put forward a nominee, you’re obviously going to present that nominee as the best choice you can find. But that’s why you have that confirmation process, to then vet that,” said Lepak.
The Banking, Financial Services and Pensions Committee vote on SJR 43 is remaining open indefinitely at the discretion of Chairman Lepak.
According to arecent editorial in The Oklahoman, SJR 43 is supported by Tulsa’s Catholic Bishop since it might make it easier to ban abortion. The measure is opposed by the League of Women Voters of Oklahoma.
If SJR 43 advances out of the committee, it will need to pass the legislature, the governor, and a vote of the people.
