Oklahoma Supreme Court allows state ballot question raising minimum wage to move ahead

More than a month after it held a hearing on the issue, the Oklahoma Supreme Court on Monday shot down efforts by the State Chamber of Oklahoma and the Oklahoma Farm Bureau to stop an initiative petition to raise the minimum wage.

State Question 832 would gradually raise the minimum wage in Oklahoma from the current $7.25 per hour to $15 in 2029. Future increases would be tied to the cost-of-living index. Supporters of the proposal filed documents with the secretary of state’s office on Oct. 27. The petition, which creates a state statute — and doesn’t amend the Oklahoma Constitution — requires 92,263 signatures to get on the ballot. Constitutional amendments require 172,993.

The Oklahoma Farm Bureau and the State Chamber sought to stop circulation of the petition. Both groups asked the court to assume original jurisdiction of the case and declare the petition "legally insufficient for submission to the voters."

Monday afternoon, the state's high court voted 6-3 to assume original jurisdiction in the case and allowed the petition to proceed. Justices Yvonne Kauger, James Winchester, James Edmondson, Douglass Combs, Noma Gurich and Richard Darby were in the majority.

Justices John Kane IV and Dustin Rowe dissented. Justice Dana Kuehn concurred in part and also dissented in part.

"The Court hereby assumes original jurisdiction pursuant to 34 O.S.2021, § 8 and denies all relief," Justice Combs, wrote for the majority. "Initiative Petition No. 446 does not clearly or manifestly violate either the Oklahoma or United States Constitution."

Court divided about on petition's constitutional question

In its brief, the State Chamber said the petition would result in" higher prices for consumers, fewer jobs for workers and greater failure rates for businesses." The farm bureau said the initiative petition would undermine its efforts to "support freedoms of farmers and ranchers, the promotion of individual liberties, private property rights and free enterprise."

In her split opinion, Kuehn wrote that she agreed with the majority that Initiative Petition 446 should go to a vote of the people, but added "I disagree with its decision to determine whether the Petition itself violates the Oklahoma Constitution."

Koehn said the state's high court first considered initiative petitions in 1910 and "concluded that the judiciary should not interfere with the initiative petition process by determining the constitutionality of the merits of a petition before it was put to a vote."

"This remained our position for decades," Kuehn wrote. "In 1975 our previous path of restraint ended. We decided that where an initiative petition violated the Oklahoma Constitution, and this Court's 'determination could prevent a costly and unnecessary election,' we may intervene in the initiative petition process before an election is held."

Justice Rowe, who dissented, wrote the court couldn't make a determination about whether or not a proposal was constitutional until it became law.

"Of course, this Court has the authority to hear a constitutional challenge to any measure which is passed and enacted into law," Rowe's dissent said. "But neither the Oklahoma Constitution nor the initiative petition statute compels this Court to address such a challenge before it is ripe — before there is any law to discuss."

Supporters pleased by court's ruling; opponents disappointed

Amber England, a spokesman for the group supporting the petition, Raise the Wage Oklahoma, said the group was pleased it had cleared a major legal hurdle "in this historic effort to gradually raise the wage for hundreds of thousands of hard-working Oklahomans."

“Politicians for far too long have ignored this issue while families struggle to make ends meet, and we know the only way to give hard-working Oklahomans the pay raise they deserve is by letting voters decide this issue for themselves at the ballot box," England said in a statement emailed to The Oklahoman on Monday evening. “The cost of gas, groceries and housing just keep going up, while wages for hard-working Oklahomans have largely stayed the same."

Everyday Oklahomans, she said, understand the importance of gradually increasing the minimum wage so that working people can earn a good living and keep up with inflation.

“We look forward to delivering a victory for all the hard-working Oklahomans who desperately need a win at the ballot box," England's statement said. “It’s time to let the people decide.”

A media statement issued Tuesday by the State Chamber criticized the high court's ruling.

“We are disappointed by the court’s decision to let SQ 832 proceed without providing any justification for the reasoning behind the decision. The six justices making this ruling failed to perform one of the most basic duties of their job by refusing to even author a majority opinion that addresses the serious constitutional arguments we raised in our legal challenge," State Chamber President and CEO Chad Warmington said. "The court’s ruling ran counter to its own precedent that was directly on point in this case. By failing to provide reasoning that either explains why that precedent is no longer valid or explains why that precedent does not apply to this state question, the court has sewn confusion and uncertainty in this area of Oklahoma law."

Warmington said the chamber commended the three justices "who seriously grappled with the questions at hand."

"Two agreed with our position and one did not, but all three took seriously their role as justices on the highest court in Oklahoma," Warmington's statement said. "The subject at hand is of great consequence to our state, and the people of Oklahoma deserve insight into the logic used by the court’s majority to reach this conclusion."

Warmington said the chamber "looked forward to a vigorous campaign to educate Oklahomans about the disastrous policy that will crush working families through price increases on the heels of record inflation and put corner stores and family farms out of business.”

Echoing the chamber, the Oklahoma Farm Bureau issued a statement Tuesday, saying it, too, was disappointed in the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision to allow the initiative petition to move forward.

"While Farm Bureau members desire a livable wage for all hardworking Oklahomans, we are concerned that tying Oklahoma’s minimum wage to a primarily urban consumer price index will paint an inaccurate picture of our state’s economy," spokesperson Rachel Havens said in a statement to The Oklahoman. "The proposal’s explicit removal of agricultural labor wage exemptions will serve only to raise prices at the grocery store, and in turn cause Oklahomans to feel the pinch in their pocketbooks — the exact opposite result this initiative seeks to obtain."

England said Raise the Wage Oklahoma will begin to collect signatures for the petition, once a date is set by the secretary of state's office.

"Right now we're waiting on a date," she said. "That's the next step."

Once a date is finalized, organizers have 90 days to collect signatures.

This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: Oklahoma minimum wage: State Supreme Court OKs initiative petition