The Open Meetings Act is so important, transparency is missing from every level of government, and to actively negate that transparency is a frightening road. But also allowing Stitt to make a decision (even from a list originating from a nominating committee) makes me sick to my stomach. Stitt’s choices are particularly foul. This is a tough one.
For what it’s worth, the three justices who wrote scathing, well-reasoned dissents for the people were Stitt appointees: Rowe, Kuehn and then Hixon as special council. In Oklahoma, the judicial nominating committee vets three justices to present to the governor. In this way, the executive power is balanced. If you read the majority opinion from the open meetings act case, the 2023 bond validation case and then the 2016 bond validation case, it’s pretty gross how they simply ignored the law they were sworn to uphold. These three justices, especially in the past decade, haven’t shown much independent thought. It’s time for them to go. It has nothing to do with left versus right. It has to do with intellectual honesty and the energy and conviction to stand up for what is lawful, even when your ‘colleagues’ are not.
I'm afraid if I elect to Not Retain the 3 judges you mention, it will allow Gov. Stitt to appoint 3 more conservative and less capable judges who could possibly serve for 7 years. What's worse? I have personally met Judge Gurich and was impresses at the time.
I was just not impressed by either of the three justices (although Gurich DID vote with us in the Open Meetings Act). The fact that Edmondson and Kauger voted to overturn our Open Meetings Act when the Supreme Court doesn't even have the jurisdiction to do so, shows their inability to fundamentally understand the law and the ramifications of their action. With that one action, they literally gutted the Open Meetings Act and made it impossible for the citizens to ever adjudicate another violation. The Supreme Court can't "subsume" every single violation that the citizens may bring against the OTA. They are only legislatively authorized to comment on BOND VALIDATION. It's absurd that the case wasn't dismissed, but it was a gross misuse of judicial power for the Supreme Court to actually rule on it. And it isn't just Edmondson, Kauger and Gurich that I want gone. I specifically want Winchester, Darby and Combs gone too.
No on all three! 100% agree 👍🏼
I will be a NO on ALL of these on the ballot
The Open Meetings Act is so important, transparency is missing from every level of government, and to actively negate that transparency is a frightening road. But also allowing Stitt to make a decision (even from a list originating from a nominating committee) makes me sick to my stomach. Stitt’s choices are particularly foul. This is a tough one.
If they are removed: then Stitt gets to appoint someone worse!!! Wake up people. Who is really behind this?
For what it’s worth, the three justices who wrote scathing, well-reasoned dissents for the people were Stitt appointees: Rowe, Kuehn and then Hixon as special council. In Oklahoma, the judicial nominating committee vets three justices to present to the governor. In this way, the executive power is balanced. If you read the majority opinion from the open meetings act case, the 2023 bond validation case and then the 2016 bond validation case, it’s pretty gross how they simply ignored the law they were sworn to uphold. These three justices, especially in the past decade, haven’t shown much independent thought. It’s time for them to go. It has nothing to do with left versus right. It has to do with intellectual honesty and the energy and conviction to stand up for what is lawful, even when your ‘colleagues’ are not.
I'm afraid if I elect to Not Retain the 3 judges you mention, it will allow Gov. Stitt to appoint 3 more conservative and less capable judges who could possibly serve for 7 years. What's worse? I have personally met Judge Gurich and was impresses at the time.
I was just not impressed by either of the three justices (although Gurich DID vote with us in the Open Meetings Act). The fact that Edmondson and Kauger voted to overturn our Open Meetings Act when the Supreme Court doesn't even have the jurisdiction to do so, shows their inability to fundamentally understand the law and the ramifications of their action. With that one action, they literally gutted the Open Meetings Act and made it impossible for the citizens to ever adjudicate another violation. The Supreme Court can't "subsume" every single violation that the citizens may bring against the OTA. They are only legislatively authorized to comment on BOND VALIDATION. It's absurd that the case wasn't dismissed, but it was a gross misuse of judicial power for the Supreme Court to actually rule on it. And it isn't just Edmondson, Kauger and Gurich that I want gone. I specifically want Winchester, Darby and Combs gone too.