Both chambers of the Oklahoma Legislature have advanced legislation to change the state process for selecting judges.

Under Oklahoma’s current system, the 15-member Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) selects up to three nominees for court positions, including the Oklahoma Supreme Court, behind closed doors. The JNC does not hold public meetings when it conducts interviews with judicial candidates and does not provide any public records of its votes on judicial nominees, even raw-number tallies. The governor is then required to select one of the three candidates put forward by the JNC and cannot consider any other qualified individuals.

That process would be changed to varying degrees under legislation advanced by both legislative chambers.

Senate Joint Resolution 6, by Senate President Pro Tempore Lonnie Paxton, would largely adopt the federal model established by the nation’s founding fathers in the U.S. Constitution.

Under SJR 6, the governor would select judicial candidates and the state Senate would then be tasked with confirming or rejecting those nominees.

“The proposed changes will bring clarity and fairness to the process,” said Paxton, R-Tuttle. “The JNC, which is supposed to be an independent body, lacks the transparency necessary to inspire public trust. It’s time to shift toward a process where elected officials, who are accountable to the voters, are directly involved in the selection of judges. With the Senate’s role in confirming judges, Oklahomans will have a better understanding of who is being appointed and how decisions are made.”

State Sen. Brian Guthrie presented the bill in the Senate Rules Committee, where it passed on a 16-3 vote.

“The current system is done behind closed doors and simply isn’t working in the best interest of Oklahomans,” said Guthrie, R-Bixby. “The federal selection process has worked for more than 200 years. With the Senate’s role in confirming judges, Oklahomans will have a better understanding of who is being appointed and how decisions are made. The Legislature will be able to hold nominees accountable, and voters will know their interests are being represented at every step of the process.”

If passed by both chambers of the Legislature, SJR 6 would then require approval by a vote of Oklahoma citizens to amend the Oklahoma Constitution and take effect.

In the Oklahoma House of Representatives, lawmakers have advanced two measures dealing with judicial selection.

House Bill 1108, by state Rep. Mark Lepak, would make meetings of the Judicial Nominating Commission subject to the state’s open-meetings law.

“We don’t know what they’re asking,” Lepak said. “We don’t know what criteria they’re using to select a judge.”

He noted that the public doesn’t even know if “the interview’s consistent from candidate to candidate” at JNC meetings.

“We deserve to see the candidates in action, to see the JNC in action, to understand who it is that we are sending to the governor, who doesn’t have any other choice but those three (candidates) to choose from,” Lepak said.  

HB 1108 passed the House Government Oversight Committee on a 13-5 vote. Unlike other JNC measures, it would not have to go to a vote of the people to take effect.

Of the 15 members of the Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission, six are appointed by the Oklahoma Bar Association via internal membership elections. No other attorneys are allowed to serve.

That would change under House Joint Resolution 1024, by state Rep. Anthony Moore, R-Clinton.

HJR 1024 would allow other JNC appointees, including those selected by the governor, to be attorneys. Among other things, the measure also removes a current requirement that the six appointees named by the governor cannot be members of the same political party. (No similar partisan limits are imposed on the bar association’s JNC appointees.)

HJR 1024 passed the House Rules Committee on a 9-1 vote. If approved by both chambers of the Legislature, HJR 1024 would then have to go to a vote of the people to amend the Oklahoma Constitution and take effect.