GENTGES v. OKLAHOMA STATE ELECTION BOARD
319 P.3d 674
| Okla. | 2014Background
- Delilah Gentges, a registered Oklahoma voter, sued the Oklahoma State Election Board to stop implementation of SB 692 (the "Voter ID Act"), which was approved by voters as Legislative Referendum 347 (State Question 746).
- Gentges argued (1) the Legislature violated Article 6 § 11 by not presenting the referendum bill to the Governor for veto before submitting it to a popular vote, and (2) the ID requirement "interfere[s] to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage" (Articles 2 § 4 and 3 § 5).
- The trial court granted summary judgment holding: the Constitution does not require presentment of a legislative referendum to the Governor before it goes to voters, and Gentges lacked standing to challenge the suffrage interference claim.
- On appeal the Oklahoma Supreme Court retained the case, reversed the trial court on standing, and affirmed that the referendum need not be presented to the Governor prior to the vote.
- The Supreme Court remanded for the trial court to decide the substantive constitutional claim about whether the ID requirements unconstitutionally interfere with voting and to address a venue challenge to 12 O.S. § 133.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to challenge that ID requirement "interferes" with suffrage | Gentges, as a registered voter, may sue to protect her right to vote and public interest; taxpayer status unnecessary | Board: taxpayer status insufficient; Gentges' possession of an Oklahoma photo ID shows no injury | Court: Gentges has standing as a registered voter to vindicate personal and public interest; reverse trial court denial |
| Whether Legislature must present a legislative referendum bill to the Governor before submitting to voters (presentment/veto) | Gentges: Article 6 § 11’s "every bill" language requires presentment and veto opportunity before popular vote | Board/Intervenors: People reserve referendum power; Article 5 and 6 read together allow legislative referenda to go directly to voters; Governor has no veto over measures "voted on by the people" | Court: Affirmed trial court — presentment to Governor prior to popular vote is not required for a legislative referendum; voters exercise the check implied by republican form |
| Whether Voter ID Act facially "interferes to prevent free exercise of suffrage" (merits) | Gentges: ID requirement is a new condition on suffrage that may unconstitutionally interfere with voting rights | Board: implementation and available IDs (e.g., driver license) show no injury; election integrity justifies requirements | Court: Issue left for trial court factfinding; remanded for record and de novo review, with guidance to balance suffrage protections and fraud-prevention authority of Legislature |
| Venue challenge under 12 O.S. § 133 (proper county for suit against State agency) | Gentges raised constitutional challenge to venue statute | Board argued Tulsa County improper, prior procedural disputes led to transfer to Oklahoma County | Court: Did not decide on merits; remanded for trial court to address venue challenge along with substantive suffrage claim |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Howard v. Oklahoma Corporation Commission, 614 P.2d 45 (Okla. 1980) (courts may grant standing to private parties to vindicate public interest in matters of great public importance)
- Sparks v. State Election Board, 392 P.2d 711 (Okla. 1964) (right to vote is a basic constitutional right; laws depriving qualified electors of vote contrary to constitutional spirit)
- In re Initiative Petition No. 348, State Question No. 640, 820 P.2d 772 (Okla. 1991) (people’s power to veto or enact by popular vote is compatible with republican government)
- Coffey v. Henry, 240 P.3d 1056 (Okla. 2010) (interpreting "every" in veto-presentment provisions in related context)
- Fields v. Saunders, 278 P.3d 577 (Okla. 2012) (constitutional challenges decided de novo by appellate court)
- Swindall v. State Election Board, 32 P.2d 691 (Okla. 1934) (voting laws must be reasonable and not destructive of constitutional rights)