Oklahoma's Silly Constitutional Amendment

Most of my readers know I am from Oklahoma, and studied law in Oklahoma - thus I have been keeping tabs on a rather unusual development happening here. State legislators have proposed amending the state constitution to ban the consideration of Shariah Law and International Law in their rulings. The amendment was approved to be sent to voters last month by the State Senate, and is a clear illustration of just how odd Oklahoma lawmakers are. Especially the author of the amendment, State Senator Rex Duncan. The relevant text of the amendment is below:

The courts shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law 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.

Professor Julian Ku has pointed out that while the amendment is Constitutional, it is incredibly over-broad and could end up hurting our state in some significant ways when it comes to foreign business investments into our state economy, as well as international trade. Believe it or not, we do have some significant international transactions happening in the state, especially in the oil and natural gas industries. Here is what Professor Ku says:

amendment is overbroad because it does not define “sharia law,” and appears to prohibit Oklahoma courts from considering international law or any other kind of foreign law in their decisions. So, a contract which selects German law, but is litigated in an OK court (like Campbell v. AIG, 976 P.2d 1102 (1999)), would be interpreted contrary to the parties’ clear intent. And a case which involves principles of international law to determine river boundaries, like Hanes v. State, 973 P.2d 330 (1998), could not be decided under those principles.... what is interesting is that Oklahoma voters will likely pass this amendment. As a constitutional amendment, I assume Oklahoma’s legislature is stuck with it, and Oklahoma courts as well. Indeed, there is no obvious basis for a constitutional challenge that I can think of offhand. This means that we may see some odd litigation and judicial decisions down the road out of Oklahoma. And it means that most foreign investors should be extremely wary of assenting to the jurisdiction of Oklahoma courts.