Oklahoma Supreme Court voids SB 632, says business-court appointments bypass voters

The Oklahoma Supreme Court held that Senate Bill 632 is unconstitutional because it circumvents the Constitution’s requirement that district judges be elected, and it declared the act void in its entirety.

In an opinion filed Oct. 7, 2025, the court concluded that although SB 632 purports to create business court divisions within existing district courts in Oklahoma County and Tulsa County, the statute’s method for selecting and reappointing business court judges — requiring the governor to appoint from a list of three candidates provided by the Speaker of the House, with Senate confirmation and eight-year terms — effectively places district-judge functions outside the electoral process required by Oklahoma Const. art. 7 §9. "We therefore conclude senate bill 632 is unconstitutional, void in its entirety and lacking legal enforceability," the opinion states (opinion of the court).

Why it matters: The ruling prevents the planned appointed business court judges from assuming office and preserves voters’ statutory right to select district judges in affected counties. The court also left in place a temporary stay of the law’s effective date while the rehearing period remains open, meaning the statute cannot be enforced pending further order.

What the court decided and how it explained it The court found petitioners — identified in the filings as Jason Waddell and Joey White Jr., resident taxpayers and registered voters in Oklahoma County — had standing as both taxpayers and voters. On taxpayer standing, the opinion records an estimated $2,000,000 in implementation costs and notes the legislature appropriated that amount to fund the measure; the court concluded the appropriation and contemplated expenditures…