Summary
The Oklahoma Supreme Court assumed original jurisdiction and issued a writ of prohibition preventing further proceedings in a challenge to S. Fred Jordan's eligibility to serve as Tulsa County district attorney. The majority held that the Oklahoma Constitution's prohibition on legislators taking office with increased emoluments did not apply because the district attorney's term would begin after Jordan's legislative term ended. Justice Taylor dissented, reasoning that Jordan would be elected during his legislative term and that the statutory challenge deadline could not bar a constitutional challenge.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Oklahoma Supreme Court should assume original jurisdiction over the petition for a writ of prohibition.
- Whether article V, section 23 of the Oklahoma Constitution prohibits a sitting legislator from being elected to an office whose emoluments were increased during the legislator's term when the office does not commence until after the legislator's term ends.
Holdings
- The Oklahoma Supreme Court assumed original jurisdiction over the petition for a writ of prohibition.
- Article V, section 23 does not prohibit a legislator from being elected or appointed to a public office during the legislator's term when that office is incapable of commencing until after the legislator's term ends.
Key quotations
“The Oklahoma Constitution, art. 5, § 23, prohibits a legislator from taking public office during the term of a Legislature which has voted to increase the emoluments for that office. The prohibition is inapplicable to a public office incapable of commencing until after the conclusion of the legislator's term.”
Factual background
S. Fred Jordan was serving as a member of the Oklahoma Legislature, with his legislative term ending November 19, 2014. He sought the office of Tulsa County district attorney, whose new term would begin January 5, 2015. During Jordan's legislative term, House Joint Resolution 1096 increased district-attorney salaries, raising a question under article V, section 23 of the Oklahoma Constitution. The Supreme Court concluded that the constitutional prohibition did not apply because the district-attorney office could not commence until after Jordan's legislative term ended.
Procedural history
The Oklahoma Supreme Court assumed original jurisdiction over the proceeding. It issued a writ prohibiting Judge Bernard Jones, or the judge assigned to Kunzweiler v. Oklahoma State Election Board, from proceeding further in Oklahoma County District Court Case No. CV-2014-1055.
Remand instructions
Judge Bernard Jones, or the judge assigned to Kunzweiler v. Oklahoma State Election Board, was prohibited from proceeding further with the cause.