AG Drummond files injunction against Biden Administration over Title X abortion overreach

Drummond files injunction against Biden Administration over Title X abortion overreach

OKLAHOMA CITY (Jan. 29, 2024) - Attorney General Gentner Drummond filed a motion Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma asking for a preliminary injunction against the Biden Administration for denying millions of dollars in funding to the Oklahoma State Department of Health (OSDH) to punish the state for being pro-life.

Oklahoma joins multistate coalition fight to end Facebook's monopoly

Oklahoma Joins Multistate Coalition in Continuing Fight to End Facebook's Illegal Monopoly

OKLAHOMA CITY - Oklahoma Attorney General John O’Connor today joined a bipartisan coalition of 48 attorneys general from around the nation in continuing to fight to end Facebook’s illegal efforts to stifle competition and protect its monopoly power. Today, the coalition — led by New York Attorney General Letitia James — filed an appeal brief arguing that the district court’s ruling dismissing the states’ case was in error. The coalition argues that the court was wrong to dismiss their case as time-barred, and made additional legal and factual errors. Over the last decade, Facebook, now known as Meta, illegally acquired competitors in a predatory manner and cut or conditioned services to smaller threats — depriving users of the benefits of competition and reducing privacy protections and services along the way — all in an effort to boost its bottom line through increased advertising revenue.

“We are asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to allow this lawsuit to proceed to hold Facebook accountable for its anticompetitive conduct and to ensure that Oklahomans have a choice in the marketplace,” said Attorney General John O’Connor.

In December 2020, the coalition filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to stop Facebook’s anticompetitive conduct. The company filed a motion to dismiss, which was granted by the court last summer. Today’s appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit asks the court to allow the coalition of attorneys general to move forward with their suit.

Long-Term Care group praises Stitt for opposing federal vax mandate

Care Providers Oklahoma Praises Gov. Stitt, AG O’Connor for Opposing Federal Vaccine Mandate on Health Care Workers

OKLAHOMA CITY – After a Capitol press conference today where Gov. Kevin Stitt and Attorney General John O’Connor touted Oklahoma’s opposition to federal vaccine mandates, Care Providers Oklahoma President and CEO Steven Buck praised the governor and the AG for mounting a strong legal challenge against mandates that would exacerbate the current health care workforce crisis. 

“The focus of our association is to help our members provide vulnerable Oklahomans with excellent care and the best quality of life in the safest environments possible,” said Buck. “At the forefront of that mission is the ability of every skilled nursing facility to field a well-trained and dedicated staff, a task that was difficult heading into the pandemic and has only intensified as it progressed.  Federal vaccine mandates, however well-intentioned, can make finding qualified staff impossible and will negatively impact senior health by forcing providers to stop taking new admissions and, in the direst circumstances, forcing them to close their doors. As I’ve been sharing for weeks, our buildings cannot afford to lose a single team member, and this federal vaccine mandate threatens our ability to provide the most basic of care. We appreciate Governor Kevin Stitt and Attorney General John O’Connor for recognizing the real-world impact of this onerous federal mandate and mounting an aggressive legal challenge."

Buck said the association and individual facilities, while opposing the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (CMS) proposed vaccine mandate on health care workers (especially since CMS did not offer an alternative pathway for employees, such as more frequent testing), are working hard to get as many residents and employees voluntarily vaccinated as possible. 

Oklahoma suing Biden admin over Nat'l Guard vax mandate

GOVERNOR STITT, ATTORNEY GENERAL O’CONNOR SUE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION OVER NATIONAL GUARD VACCINE MANDATE

Stitt: “It is unconscionable that Biden is choosing to play politics with military paychecks.”

OKLAHOMA CITY (Dec. 2, 2021) – Governor Kevin Stitt released the following statement regarding a federal lawsuit filed today to prohibit the Biden administration from punishing members of the Oklahoma National Guard for not being vaccinated against COVID-19 while in Title 32 status:

“The U.S. Constitution, the Oklahoma Constitution, and U.S. Code Title 32 are all clear: as governor, I am the Commander-in-Chief of the Oklahoma National Guard.

“Therefore, unless mobilized by the President of the United States under U.S. Code Title10, I retain the authority for all training and governance of the Oklahoma National Guard – including determining if and how training guidelines issued by the president will be implemented.

“This week, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin declared his intention to proceed with unconstitutional punishment that individually targets Oklahoma National Guard soldiers and airmen, including withholding their pay.

“It is unconscionable that President Biden and his administration are choosing to play politics with military paychecks, especially amid the highest inflation rate in 30 years and so close to the holiday season.

“Threatening the pay of National Guard members is manifestly unlawful and unfair, as unvaccinated active-duty personnel do not have their pay withheld.

“Further, it is hypocritical that Secretary Austin addresses the importance of medical readiness in his letter but fails to mention that unlike active-duty personnel, National Guard members are not provided health care and must purchase it themselves. If medical readiness is truly that high of a priority to the Department of Defense, it should provide health care for all National Guard Soldiers and Airmen like it does for active duty service members.

“I will continue fighting to protect Oklahoma against this alarming pattern of unconstitutional federal overreach coming from the Biden administration.”

Attorney General O'Connor Sues Over COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate for Military and Federal Employees

OKLAHOMA CITY - Today, the State of Oklahoma filed a lawsuit against the Biden Administration to stop its mandatory COVID-19 vaccination requirement for federal employees and the National Guard.  The Office of the Oklahoma Attorney General has asked a federal court to grant a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and/or preliminary injunction followed by a permanent injunction, preventing the Biden Administration from enforcing the vaccine mandate.

Additionally, the lawsuit asks the Court to block the Biden Administration from withholding federal funding from the Oklahoma National Guard or its Guard members.  Finally, our office asks the Court to declare the mandate unconstitutional on multiple grounds.

“Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate ensures that many Oklahoma National Guard members will simply quit instead of getting a vaccine, a situation that will irreparably harm Oklahomans’ safety and security,” said Attorney General John O’Connor.  “These patriots, along with many federal employees, who serve their country and their state are now at risk of being terminated because they do not wish to take the vaccine.”

Stitt files response to Choctaw, Cherokee and Chickasaw federal lawsuit

OFFICE OF GOVERNOR STITT FILES RESPONSE IN FEDERAL COURT TO CHOCTAW, CHEROKEE, CHICKASAW NATIONS’ LAWSUIT

Oklahoma City, Okla. (Jan. 22, 2020) – The Office of Governor Kevin Stitt today filed the response in federal court to the Choctaw, Cherokee and Chickasaw Nations’ lawsuit regarding the January 1, 2020 expiration date in the Model Gaming Compact.

A copy of the office’s filed response is attached.

The Office of the Governor will be represented by two local law firms: Lytle, Soulé and Felty of Oklahoma City and Ryan Whaley of Oklahoma City. As a result of the tribes filing a federal lawsuit against the office of the Governor on New Year’s Eve, the office chose to shift resources towards hiring experienced local counsel to represent the governor in this legal dispute. Perkins Coie will no longer be consulting the State in negotiating a Model Gaming Compact as of Friday, Jan. 24.

STITT OP-ED: OPPORTUNITY CONTINUES TO NEGOTIATE A WIN FOR ALL 4 MILLION OKLAHOMANS

by Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt

When I came into office, I inherited letters from two Oklahoma tribes concerned that their Model Gaming Compact would expire on January 1, 2020. They explained that their compacts were “dated” and “unsuitable for the current and future business environment of gaming in Oklahoma” and asked that the State begin negotiating new gaming compacts.

I took those letters seriously and consulted numerous legal experts to learn more. They all agreed the compacts expired on January 1, 2020.  Therefore, in July 2019, I invited all Oklahoma tribes to discuss new gaming compacts. Our goal was to update compact terms to be more responsive to market conditions and to better account for the State’s interests while protecting economic growth and development for our tribal partners.

I still hold to that mission today.

I believe that a new compact should more equitably allocate fees among tribes. It should include protections to require vendors not to exceed national market rates. And it should address changing market conditions.

The past 15 years have proven  the exclusivity promised by the State to be more valuable than anyone anticipated. But that value has not been enjoyed equally by all tribes or shared appropriately with the State. Increasing fees at the highest market revenue levels to better support our public schools and mental health services while reducing fees to benefit the tribes operating smaller gaming operations ought to be a topic for discussion.

And fifteen years ago, the parties knew that. They promised to renegotiate fees and exclusivity, regardless of whether the compacts renewed or expired. Unfortunately, most tribes have refused to renegotiate any part of the compact, unless the State first conceded that the compacts automatically renew indefinitely.

I have tried to protect tribal gaming, the public, and our schools. The State attempted to initiate negotiations four times since the dispute started. The tribes have repeatedly refused to even listen to a proposal. The State proposed arbitration to resolve our disagreement. The tribes refused. We offered an 8-month compact extension that preserved everyone’s legal arguments to create more time for productive conversations. All but two tribes refused.

I was deeply disappointed that our most successful gaming tribes, the Chickasaw, Choctaw, and Cherokee Nations, rejected the State’s desire to resolve this outside of the courtroom as well as the 8-month extension, choosing instead sue my office on New Year’s Eve. At no point had the State attempted to disrupt gaming operations. No advantage is gained by harming tribal economies or compromising school funding while this dispute is being resolved.

With respect to the lawsuit, we will defend our interpretation of the compact expiration provision. The State has not authorized any electronic gaming since 2004, when Oklahoma voters approved the Tribal-State compacts. I will work to enforce that expiration term because not doing so would allow the administrative acts of unelected officials to dictate state policy and effect significant changes in state governance.

As this lawsuit progresses, I will continue to pursue negotiations of a new gaming compact that enhances opportunities for Oklahoma’s tribes, of all sizes, to fairly compete for business to ensure that no party is adversely impacted once the court rules.  I am ready to meet with the tribes, as I have been since July.

When we are all committed to listening to each other and coming together to one table, I am confident we can achieve a win-win for all 4 million Oklahomans today and well into the future.

AG Hunter joins Ohio’s fight against Planned Parenthood and State Funding of Abortion Clinics

Attorney General Hunter Joins Ohio’s Fight Against Planned Parenthood and State Funding of Abortion Clinics

OKLAHOMA CITY – Attorney General Mike Hunter has joined 12 other state attorneys general in asking a federal appeals court to rehear a case in front of the full court after a three judge panel decided that Ohio must provide funding to Planned Parenthood.

In the brief, attorneys general argue the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit contradicts prior court decisions, including the Supreme Court that has repeatedly ruled that states do not have to provide taxpayer funds to Planned Parenthood.

Attorney General Hunter said the ruling has potential to negatively impact Oklahoma’s laws that ban the use of public funds for abortions and abortion providers.

“The state of Oklahoma has defended the sanctity of human life by passing laws that protect the unborn,” Attorney General Hunter said. "The ruling by the 6th Circuit undermines a state’s authority to oversee and appropriate taxpayer dollars. I continue to be an ardent supporter of the right to life and am proud to stand with my colleagues to contest any attempt to abridge laws that protect the unborn.”

In question is a 2016 law that banned Ohio abortion provider advocates from receiving state funds for six health care programs. Last month, the three judge panel on the 6th Circuit found Ohio’s law unfairly punished Planned Parenthood by taking away funding for the programs because the organization promotes abortion.

The brief argues, Ohio has a clear policy that prefers childbirth over abortion and does not want to use taxpayer dollars to promote abortion. In any of these programs, Ohio faces the risk of funding Planned Parenthood, which would promote abortion with taxpayer dollars.

“When the government disburses public funds to private entities to convey a governmental message, it may take legitimate and appropriate steps to ensure that its message is neither garbled nor distorted by the grantee,” attorneys general write, citing a prior U.S. Supreme Court decision. “What could be a more legitimate and appropriate step to keep one’s message of preferring childbirth over abortion from being garbled than to decide to not choose a speaker who spends much of its time communicating the opposite message?” 

In addition to Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter, the brief was signed by attorneys general of Arkansas, Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and Wisconsin.

Read the brief, here: https://bit.ly/2IANaXc.

Related
Since taking office, Attorney General has prioritized and advocated for the life and rights of the unborn. Currently, he is working in support of states that cut off Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood after videos surfaced showing that the organization had been illegally harvesting and selling fetal body parts, appealing a court ruling that physicians may administer medication abortions using a method that has killed several women, actively defending laws that prohibit “dismemberment abortions,” where a living, unborn child is torn apart piece by piece and filed a brief in support of a 20-week abortion ban.

For more on Attorney General Hunter’s continued support of the unborn, click here: https://bit.ly/2I4Dchs.

Pruitt hails victory in Obamacare lawsuit

Oklahoma's fantastic Attorney General hits another homer:

Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt

Oklahoma Wins Affordable Care Act Lawsuit Challenging IRS Subsidies

OKLAHOMA CITY – Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt hailed the state’s victory in its lawsuit challenging the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. In September 2012, Oklahoma was the first to challenge the legality of an IRS rule that caused billions in illegal subsidies to be paid out, despite Congress having never authorized those payments. On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Ronald White ruled in favor of the state’s lawsuit challenging that IRS rule.

“Today’s ruling is a consequential victory for the rule of law. The administration and its bureaucrats in the IRS handed out billions in illegal tax credits and subsidies and vastly expanded the reach of the health care law because they didn’t like the way Congress wrote the Affordable Care Act. That’s not how our system of government works,” Attorney General Pruitt said. “The Obama administration created this problem and rather than having an agency like the IRS rewrite a law it didn’t like, the administration should have done the right thing and worked with Congress to amend the law. Oklahoma was the first to challenge the administration's actions and today's ruling vindicates what we recognized early on and that is the administration can't rewrite the Affordable Care Act by executive fiat.”

Oklahoma’s lawsuit challenges an IRS rule from May 2012 that called for 1) tax subsidies to be issued in states like Oklahoma without a state-based health care exchange and 2) assessed “large employer” penalties in states that did not establish state health care exchanges. Both parts of the rule contradict the language of the ACA, which plainly states that tax subsidies can only be issued and tax penalties are only to be assessed in states that established state-based health care exchanges.

The ruling in the Eastern District of Oklahoma can be appealed by the Department of Justice to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver. Click here for a copy of the judge's order.

“Today’s ruling is a huge win for Oklahoma, but it’s just a first step. Since Oklahoma filed the first lawsuit in 2012, others have followed our lead and made similar claims in other jurisdictions. It’s likely this issue will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. We look forward to making our case and continuing the effort to hold federal agencies accountable to their duty to enforce the laws passed by Congress,” Attorney General Pruitt said.

Attorney General Pruitt expressed thanks to the attorneys in the AG’s Office who worked on this case.

“I want to thank Solicitor General Patrick Wyrick and the attorneys in our federalism unit for their dedication and outstanding legal work on this important case,” General Pruitt said.

AG Pruitt Files Federal Lawsuit against Health Care Act

 

Oklahoma Attorney General E. Scott Pruitt Files Federal Lawsuit against Health Care Act

Lawsuit includes strengthened arguments focused on defeating
individual mandate and striking the entire health care act based on non-severability

OKLAHOMA CITY – Oklahoma Attorney General E. Scott Pruitt today filed a lawsuit on behalf of the state of Oklahoma, making it the 28th state to challenge the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision of the federal health care act.

The Attorney General explained the lawsuit will enhance the collective efforts of the majority of states suing the federal government because it contains strengthened arguments against the independent mandate in response to shifting legal strategy by the federal government. It further includes allegations that focus on the non-severability of the health care act, which would find the entire act to be invalid if any part is held to be unconstitutional.

“We have an advantage of learning from the arguments the federal government put forth in the legal proceedings with Virginia and Florida, which allows Oklahoma to enhance the strategy used by those respective states.  We did this to address the federal government’s citing of the Necessary and Proper Clause to justify the individual mandate, even though any use of the clause must be consistent with both ‘the letter and spirit’ of the Constitution, which this act is not,” Pruitt said. “We also have included robust allegations that seek to have the entire act stricken by addressing the non-severability of the law.”

Additionally, the lawsuit will defend Oklahoma’s recent passage of the Oklahoma Health Care Freedom Amendment, which amended the state Constitution to say that Oklahomans cannot be required to purchase individual health care coverage. 

 “Again, there is great clarity for me on the necessary and urgent need to exercise my responsibility to defend Oklahoma’s Constitution against a federal law that requires our state’s citizens to purchase a product or face penalties from the federal government,” Pruitt said. “In November, Oklahoma voters made clear their belief that the federal government, in this instance, has overreached its power and authority.”

The complaint, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, raises the issue of whether the U.S. Congress is empowered under the Commerce Clause to require citizens to purchase health insurance coverage or be penalized for not doing so.

The challenged provision, Section 1501 of the Act, is commonly known as the Individual Mandate. This provision requires that every U.S. citizen, other than those falling within specified exceptions, maintain a minimum level of health insurance coverage beginning in 2014. Failure to comply will result in a penalty included in the taxpayer’s annual tax return.

This mandate will require non-exempt Oklahomans to either purchase health insurance for themselves and their dependents or pay a civil penalty designed to force them into such a purchase.

“By voting to pass State Question 756 by an overwhelming margin, the people of Oklahoma made it clear that a federally enforced mandate to purchase health insurance is both undesirable and unconstitutional,” Gov. Mary Fallin said. “Furthermore, President Obama’s health care plan would cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars in the middle of a severe budget crisis. I am proud that Oklahoma can now be counted among the states standing up for constitutional rights and opposing a law that is harmful to both our economy and to the health of our citizens.”

Pruitt added that Oklahoma’s recently approved Oklahoma Health Care Freedom Amendment and the federal health care act cannot coexist, and that federal preemption does not apply when a federal law is deemed unconstitutional.

As such, he commented on his obligation to defend the Oklahoma law, “The most logical way to defend our state Constitution is in an Oklahoma federal court, not in another state,” Pruitt said.

Additionally, by filing in Oklahoma, the state adds another circuit of the federal court system considering arguments on the constitutionality of the act.  This enhances the reasons for the U.S. Supreme Court to expedite a hearing on the issue.

 “I deeply respect the efforts of General Pam Bondi, and the other Attorneys General involved in the Florida litigation as well as the efforts of General Ken Cuccinelli in Virginia,” Pruitt said. “I am confident with our collective efforts we will prevail.”

The Oklahoma lawsuit will be handled by internal staff in the Attorney General’s office, and no outside counsel will be retained. 

To read the complaint, go online to www.oag.ok.gov.