Re: Judicial Mischief in Oklahoma?

A follow-up to yesterday’s post:

Here’s the judge’s opinion in support of her TRO barring Oklahoma election officials from certifying the voters’ adoption of a constitutional amendment barring Oklahoma state courts from considering or using international law or shariah law in deciding cases.

On a quick read, I don’t find compelling the judge’s conclusion that the plaintiff “has shown a substantial likelihood of success” on his Establishment Clause claim. In particular, I don’t see how the plaintiff’s proffered evidence shows that the amendment’s “actual purpose is to disapprove of plaintiff’s faith.” The judge’s separate conclusion that the amendment violates plaintiff’s free-exercise rights seems equally ill-founded.

I’m also puzzled as to why the appropriate remedy for the supposed violations is to bar certification of the election results.

Most Popular


Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More