The Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs defends the freedom and opportunity of Oklahomans through principled legal advocacy.

We believe every Oklahoman—regardless of background or income—should be free to work, create, and pursue a better future without unnecessary government interference. When unjust laws or regulations threaten those freedoms, we stand up on behalf of Oklahomans at no cost to them. Through strategic legal action, we work to protect economic liberty, property rights, and constitutional limits on government power, ensuring that policy serves the people—not the other way around.

Leadership

  • Ryan Haynie

    Vice President for Legal Affairs

    Ryan Haynie is the Vice President for Legal Affairs for the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs. This unique position allows him to engage in issue advocacy at the Oklahoma Capitol as well as legal advocacy in Oklahoma courtrooms. He litigates cases involving free speech and other constitutional rights in both state and federal courts. He also writes amicus briefs defending laws OCPA has worked hard to pass in the Oklahoma Legislature. 

    In 2024, Ryan helped develop OCPA’s Judicial Scorecard. Like OCPA’s Legislative Scorecard, it helps to educate Oklahomans on what the third branch of government is doing. The Judicial Scorecard scores Oklahoma’s Supreme Court justices based on how they conform to the rule of law, separation of powers, and sound textual interpretation. 

    Prior to joining OCPA, Ryan was in private practice. He is active in the Federalist Society, serving as the Programming Director for the Oklahoma City Lawyer’s Chapter. He holds a B.B.A. from the University of Oklahoma and a J.D. from the University of Oklahoma College of Law. He and his wife, Jaclyn, live in Oklahoma City with their three children.

Current Cases

  • Johnson v. The University of Oklahoma

    Challenging race-based financial aid policies under the Equal Protection Clause

    Cooper & Kirk partnered with OCPA to bring this class-action lawsuit to challenge the financial aid policies of the University of Oklahoma. The complaint alleges the University of Oklahoma distributes financial aid based on racial characteristics which is prohibited under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 

  • AMICUS: McVay v. Cockroft

    Defending Oklahoma’s initiative petition process and legislative safeguards

    This original jurisdiction case before the Oklahoma Supreme Court challenged SB 1027–a law passed by the Oklahoma Legislature which added protections to Oklahoma’s initiative petition process. The legal center teamed up with the Plaxico Law Firm to represent a former governor and two former attorneys general in defense of the law.

  • AMICUS: Black Emergency Response Team v. Drummond

    Defending Oklahoma’s anti-CRT law against constitutional challenge

    On appeal from the Western District of Oklahoma, this appeal dealt with a challenge to HB 1775, commonly referred to as Oklahoma’s “anti-CRT” bill. OCPA, after working to help secure passage of the law in 2021, filed an amicus brief on its own behalf in the Tenth Circuit to defend the law.

  • AMICUS: Meeks v. State

    Defending free speech and challenging unconstitutional prosecution under a protective order

    This case is on appeal with the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals from a conviction in Bryan County. The defendant was convicted of stalking for the simple act of publishing a YouTube video that referenced his ex-wife who had a protective order against him. OCPA argued both the terms of the protective order and his prosecution were unconstitutional.

Past Cases

  • AMICUS: Poe v. Drummond

    Protecting children from life-altering medical interventions

    When the ACLU sued the State to enjoin enforcement of Oklahoma’s law prohibiting minors from receiving puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and sex change surgeries, OCPA joined with Do No Harm to file amicus briefs in the Northern District of Oklahoma and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. In 2025, the United States Supreme Court decided United States v. Skrmetti which held these laws do not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.