Open primary proponents challenge Oklahoma law capping initiative petition signatures

12 June 2025

By Alexia Aston, The Oklahoman

Key Points:

• Two lawsuits challenge Oklahoma's new law limiting initiative petition signatures from a single county.

• Supporters of open primaries argue the law is unconstitutional and aims to stifle their efforts to open Oklahoma's primary elections.

• Lawmakers supporting the bill say it increases transparency and ensures broader representation in the initiative petition process.

  
  

Open primary supporters in Oklahoma have filed two lawsuits in the Oklahoma Supreme Court challenging a new state law that limits the number of initiative petition signatures that can be collected from a single county.

One lawsuit asks the court to declare the "retroactive provision" of Senate Bill 1027 unconstitutional. The other lawsuit challenges the overall constitutionality of the bill.

SB 1027, authored by Sen. David Bullard, R-Durant, mandates that the maximum number of signatures from a single county cannot exceed 11.5% of the number of votes cast in the most recent gubernatorial election. For constitutional amendments, that maximum number is 20.8%.

Opponents contend those limits disenfranchise voters, particularly in urban areas.

Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt signed the bill into law, which was a priority for many GOP lawmakers this legislative session, on Friday, May 23. It took effect immediately.

The bill comes as proponents of open primaries await a start date to begin collecting signatures for State Question 836, a measure that would open Oklahoma primary elections to all voters, with the top two candidates advancing to the general election.

“You don’t have to agree with SQ 836 to see what’s happening here is wrong,” said Dr. Ken Setter, a proponent of SQ 836 and a plaintiff in both lawsuits. “Politicians should not be attempting to stop this measure by sabotaging it with unconstitutional laws. They should let the voters decide.

The lawsuit challenging the bill's "retroactive" provision asks the court to temporarily block the law during litigation, arguing that attempting to comply with SB 1027 during such time will jeopardize signature-gatherers' ability to collect enough signatures to qualify their measure for the ballot.

Supporters of SB 1027 have argued that the current process for state questions leaves out rural Oklahomans. In May, Senate Pro Tempore Lonnie Paxton, R-Tulsa, said the bill gives more Oklahomans a voice in what qualifies for the ballot because signatures can't come solely from the state's biggest metro areas.

Along with signature limits in single counties, SB 1027 also requires a petition's gist to be written in basic words explaining the measure. It requires petition circulators to be registered voters in Oklahoma and disclose the organization that's paying them.

"All Oklahomans should know what they are voting on and who [is] behind the initiatives being pushed," Paxton, a co-author on the bill, said at the time. "I don't know how more transparency and more voices being heard in the process is a bad thing."

Paxton, Bullard and House Speaker Kyle Hilbert, R-Bristow, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the legal challenges.

Anthony Stobbe, a plaintiff in both lawsuits and a registered independent, said that as a retired U.S. Coast Guard Commander, he served his country, "not a political party." He added that being politically independent is important to him, along with thousands of other veterans and active-duty military across Oklahoma.

"Not being able to vote in Oklahoma’s most meaningful elections is a slap in the face," Stobbe said in a news release. "Having an unconstitutional law try to block the very state question meant to fix that problem is even worse.”

The lawsuit challenging SB 1027's overall constitutionality argues that the law infringes on the rights of Oklahomans to propose amendments to the state constitution through referendums. It also claims the law threatens restrictions on legislative authority, separation of powers, equal protection and political speech and association."

“Senate Bill 1027 is an outright attack on the people’s right to govern themselves,” said Amy Cerato, a well-known opponent of the ACCESS Oklahoma turnpike project. “I’ve been organizing to hold the government accountable for years, and I’ve never seen such a blatant power grab to silence Oklahomans’ voices. This law is designed to make direct democracy in Oklahoma impossible.”