Submitted by Paul Jacob (not verified) on April 21, 2008 - 1:07am.
There will be a preliminary hearing in Oklahoma City on July 23 for the Oklahoma 3 -- myself, Susan Johnson, head of the petition management firm National Voter Outreach, and Rick Carpenter of Tulsa, head of Oklahomans in Action.
Re: the Oklahoma civil rights measure, from the reports I heard, there was indeed a climate of fear surrounding this petition effort. That is really depressing. I also am told that many Oklahoma residents, who for years have gathered signatures on petitions in Oklahoma as well as in other states, now prefer to do their petition work exclusively out of state. Better safe than sorry.
Mr. Zarko is correct, in my humble opinion, that Oklahoma's residency law is unconstitutional. It is now being challenged in federal court. It was upheld by a district court in Okla and is now on appeal at the 10th Circuit. Also, it is worth noting that a challenge to Arizona's residency law concerning independent candidate petitions -- Nader v. Brewer -- was heard in the 9th Circuit in San Francisco last week. Richard Winger in his Ballot Access News website reported that the justices seemed skeptical of the residency requirement there.
Having said all that about the constitutionality, let me make it clear that everyone I know who worked on the Oklahoma TABOR and eminent domain petition drives in 2005 obeyed the law as it was understood, from what state officials told folks on the ground who were managing the effort. There are far too many unconstitutional requirements in petition drives, but people are wise to either follow the law or to challenge it in court. In Oklahoma, we followed the law. I think we'll prove that in court someday, though it can't be soon enough for me.
It is nice to see this blog. It is needed. Keep up the great work.
Court Proceedings
There will be a preliminary hearing in Oklahoma City on July 23 for the Oklahoma 3 -- myself, Susan Johnson, head of the petition management firm National Voter Outreach, and Rick Carpenter of Tulsa, head of Oklahomans in Action.
Re: the Oklahoma civil rights measure, from the reports I heard, there was indeed a climate of fear surrounding this petition effort. That is really depressing. I also am told that many Oklahoma residents, who for years have gathered signatures on petitions in Oklahoma as well as in other states, now prefer to do their petition work exclusively out of state. Better safe than sorry.
Mr. Zarko is correct, in my humble opinion, that Oklahoma's residency law is unconstitutional. It is now being challenged in federal court. It was upheld by a district court in Okla and is now on appeal at the 10th Circuit. Also, it is worth noting that a challenge to Arizona's residency law concerning independent candidate petitions -- Nader v. Brewer -- was heard in the 9th Circuit in San Francisco last week. Richard Winger in his Ballot Access News website reported that the justices seemed skeptical of the residency requirement there.
Having said all that about the constitutionality, let me make it clear that everyone I know who worked on the Oklahoma TABOR and eminent domain petition drives in 2005 obeyed the law as it was understood, from what state officials told folks on the ground who were managing the effort. There are far too many unconstitutional requirements in petition drives, but people are wise to either follow the law or to challenge it in court. In Oklahoma, we followed the law. I think we'll prove that in court someday, though it can't be soon enough for me.
It is nice to see this blog. It is needed. Keep up the great work.