The next election is Tuesday, November 3, 2026

Get the 2026 Voter Guide PDF in English or Spanish!

State Question 845

BALLOT TITLE

This measure amends article 7-B, section 3 of the Oklahoma Constitution, changing the Judicial Nominating Commission’s structure. Currently appointments are based on congressional districts as constituted in 1967. If approved, appointments to the fifteen-member Commission will be as follows: 1) Governor appoints six members, including one from each congressional district as of the time of their appointment; 2) the Oklahoma Bar Association appoints six members, including one from each congressional district as of the date of selection; and 3) no less than eight members select three at-large members. The measure will permit any number of commissioners to be licensed attorneys in Oklahoma or another state. The prohibition against immediate family members from practicing law will be removed. The measure changes terms so that at-large commissioners would serve a two-year term, and all other commissioners would serve a six-year term. Additionally, it removes restrictions on political party membership for members appointed by the Governor and at-large members. The measure also permits a commissioner to succeed himself or herself. Vacancies will be filled in the same manner as a commissioner is appointed or selected for the remainder of the relevant term. This measure will not have a fiscal impact.

Shall The Proposal Be Approved?

Legislative Referendum 379: Judicial Nominating Commission

SUMMARY

The Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission nominates candidates for state justices and judges to the governor when there are vacancies. This measure would change how the Judicial Nominating Commission is organized and how its members are selected. The governor and the Oklahoma Bar Association would each appoint six members to the commission — including one from each of the state’s current congressional districts — and then at least eight of those twelve members would choose three additional at-large members. The proposal would remove limits on how many commission members can be lawyers, and would allow people with close family members who practice law to serve. The measure would shorten the terms of the at-large members to two years while keeping six-year terms for the selected appointed members. It would also remove the constitutional requirement of having balanced political party representation for the members appointed by the governor and the three at-large members, which means a greater number of commissioners can be from the same party.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

https://www.kosu.org/oklahoma-judicial-reform-legislation-advances

https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_State_Question_845,_Changes_to_Judicial_Nominating_Commission_Amendment_(2026)

BOTH SIDES

PROPONENTS SAY:

  • Oklahoma is a supermajority state. Requiring partisan balance on the Judicial Nominating Commission allows influence from the minority party that is not equitable for the majority party.
  • The governor, as an elected official, should have more influence over judicial appointments through the ability to select judges from one party over another.
  • The current judicial appointment system uses old congressional maps and is outdated; its restrictions are unnecessary.

OPPONENTS SAY:

  • Oklahomans voted in the current requirements for partisan balance and restrictions on a  nominating commissioner’s family members being practicing attorneys after a series of corruption scandals in the 1960s.
  • Removing these restrictions allows for corruption to be a  possibility again.
  • Removing the political party balance among at-large members and those appointed by the governor is an effort to allow one political party to control the commission.
  • Eliminating restrictions on commissioners having family members who practice law creates more opportunities for conflicts of interest.