ACLJ and State Legislators File Brief in Defense of Life in Oklahoma Supreme Court

The American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ) just filed an amici curiae (friends-of-the-court) brief in the Oklahoma Supreme Court in defense of the state’s abortion ban. The brief was filed on behalf of the ACLJ, more than 127,000 of its supporters (including more than 2,200 in Oklahoma), and forty-one (41)  Members of the Oklahoma Senate and House – including sponsors of the bill we are defending.

The abortion industry filed the lawsuit in an attempt to convince the state’s Supreme Court to “create” a right to abortion in the state’s Constitution. The pro-abortion petitioners are challenging two Oklahoma laws that proscribe abortions: one was enacted in 1910 (and was in effect except when Roe v. Wade and its progeny were in place) and a recent 2022 law.

Up to now, the Oklahoma Supreme Court has never “found” a right to abortion in the state’s Constitution. That is not surprising. Oklahoma has consistently prohibited abortion. Even before Oklahoma became a state, abortion was outlawed in the Oklahoma Territory, except to save the life of the mother, and soon after Oklahoma became a state, it enacted the 1910 law, which is similar to the earlier law. Indeed, in 1936, the Oklahoma Supreme Court explained that the state’s anti-abortion statutes “were enacted and designed for the protection of the unborn child and through it society.”

As we explain in our brief, abortion implicates many significant interests—including those of the unborn child who may be killed, the child’s parents, the government, and the public—and it also “presents a profound moral issue on which Americans hold sharply conflicting views.” The basic premise of petitioners’ lawsuit, however, is that the Oklahoma Constitution gives one group of human beings (pregnant women) a “right” to have other separate, unique, living human beings (unborn children) intentionally killed, and neither the public nor the legislative branch of government has much, if any, say in the matter.

We explain that the question of when and whether the law should authorize, or at least excuse, the intentional killing of a living human being is never a primarily private question. To the contrary, both the public and the government clearly have compelling interests at stake whenever human life is being taken. The fact that a particular killing impacts the individuals involved in a more direct way than it impacts the general public does not render legislatures powerless to carefully weigh the competing interests at stake and set policies that reflect the values of the public.

We explain further that state legislatures have ample room to regulate conduct where one’s exercise of a purported right directly harms others. The policy arguments raised by petitioners in their lawsuit should be presented to the proper audience: the legislature, and the public at large. If the amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution proposed by petitioners occurs, if it occurs at all, it has to take place through the constitutional amendment process, not through the amendment-by-litigation strategy that their lawsuit represents.

We urge the Oklahoma Supreme Court to reject petitioners’ request to effectively destroy the rightful authority of the public and the legislature to weigh the various significant interests at play and determine abortion policy.

In addition to our supporters, the following Oklahoma State Legislators signed onto our brief:

Members of the Oklahoma House of Representatives – Majority Floor Leader Jon Echols, and Representatives Sherrie Conley, Tom Gann, Brad Boles, Marilyn Stark, Dick Lowe, Jim Olsen, Mark Lepak, Anthony Moore, Danny Williams, Jim Grego, Sheila Dills, Robert Manger, Chris Sneed, Rusty Cornwell, Mark Lawson, Kevin McDugle, Todd Russ, Tammy Townley, Lonnie Sims, Terry O'Donnell, Avery Frix, Brian Hill, Jeff Boatman, Denise Crosswhite Hader, Mark Vancuren, Rhonda Baker, Ross Ford, Ty Burns, Stan May, Cynthia Roe, and Mark McBride.

Members of the Oklahoma Senate – Senators David Bullard, Brent Howard, George Burns, Micheal Bergstrom, Warren Hamilton, Roland Pederson, Dave Rader, Jake Merrick, and Nathan Dahm.

House Majority Floor Leader Jon Echols, who we’ve worked with before, had this to say:

I’m proud to join the ACLJ’s excellent brief and am grateful that the ACLJ has come alongside us here in Oklahoma to defend our laws and our Constitution, and, more importantly, to defend vulnerable lives from an industry that exploits women and unborn babies for profit. We will continue to stand together to protect life and the rule of law. The legislature, in which I have served with gratitude, expresses the will of the people. This is one of the fundamental building blocks of our system of government. I appreciate the ACLJ’s work on behalf of Oklahomans.

It is our honor to join this fight.

The Oklahoma lawsuit is just one of many lawsuits occurring in courtrooms across the country now that Dobbs has reversed Roe and has restored the authority to address the abortion issue to the states, where it existed before Roe. The ACLJ is engaged in those battles. Along with the filing of our brief in the Oklahoma Supreme Court, we have filed two briefs in the Michigan Supreme Court in opposition to Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s attempt to have that court create an abortion right in the Michigan Constitution. You can read more about what is occurring in Michigan, here, here, here, and here.

The ACLJ will continue to fight to protect the unborn, and we will continue to keep you informed about our efforts.