As we mentioned last week, last fall, Oklahoma voters adopted State Question 755, which would have amended Section 1 of Article VII of the Oklahoma Constitution. Shortly after the election, a lawsuit was filed asking the federal court to block the amendment from being implemented. The federal court granted the request, and the issue is now before the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. 

 

     The appeals court is primarily concerned with the portion of State Question 755 that provides courts “shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international or Sharia Law. The provisions of this subsection shall apply to all cases before the respective courts including, but not limited to, cases of first impression.”

 

     Before we can understand the impact this law could have on Oklahoma citizens and businesses, we must try to analyze what this law means. However, it is unclear what this amendment actually prohibits a court from considering. For instance, what is meant by “legal precepts”? Generally, “precept” is defined to mean “principles.” Does the law thus preclude consideration of all laws of all foreign countries? Does it preclude consideration of judgments of the courts of other nations? The breadth of the term suggests it likely does.

 

     And, what is meant by “international law”? International law is generally recognized as being defined by treaty or custom, rather than any specific country’s laws. The United States has entered into many international treaties on a vast number of subjects. These treaties have been approved both by the President and a two-thirds majority of the Senate and are usually deemed to be federal law. If these treaties are considered federal law, are they still also international law, under the amendment?