By SEAN MURPHY (AP) – 3 hours ago

OKLAHOMA CITY — With full control of the Oklahoma Legislature for the first time, Republicans have been flexing their political muscles, passing laws they know will face court challenges, including ones making it harder to get abortions and easier to buy guns.

With the state more than $1 billion in the red, however, even some among their ranks wonder if they can afford such success.

"I respect my colleagues' right to put those issues out there, and I generally vote for most of them, if not all of them. But in these budget times, it is kind of concerning," said Republican state Rep. Doug Cox, of Grove.

Democratic Gov. Brad Henry vetoed a law Tuesday that would restrict federal authorities' ability to regulate the sale of firearms produced and kept in Oklahoma. The Justice Department is challenging a similar law in Montana, and constitutional experts say there is little chance any court would uphold the law.

"It simply makes no sense to continue to pass unconstitutional measures that run up legal bills and waste taxpayers' money," Henry said after rejecting the bill. Despite its slim chances of being upheld, its Republican sponsor has vowed to override the veto.

Lawmakers didn't have much trouble this week overriding Henry's veto of two bills critics have said give Oklahoma some of the strictest abortion laws in the country. One law requires women seeking abortions to undergo an intrusive method of ultrasound early in their pregnancies.

Henry predicted the bill could lead to a "potential futile legal battle," and already an abortion rights group has challenged the ultrasound bill's constitutionality.

"In addition to being constitutionally suspect, these bills are fiscally irresponsible," said University of Oklahoma constitutional law professor Joseph Thai. "Taxpayers may not appreciate that a challenged law costs hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to litigate."

The number of lawsuits challenging state statutes has jumped each of the past three years — with 15 cases filed in 2007, 18 in 2008 and 24 last year. Most cases are handled by the Attorney General's Office, which didn't have an estimate of the number of hours it has spent defending such challenges. But the state sometimes hires outside counsel, as was the case with one lawyer who billed the state $90,000 to defend it against two lawsuits challenging other abortion laws that ultimately were overturned.

In some cases, the number of attorney hours can easily climb into the thousands, and if the state loses, they can be forced to pay attorney fees for the other side, said Micheal Salem, an attorney who reached a "six-figure" settlement with the state last year over a challenge to an Oklahoma law on initiative petition circulators. He declined to disclose the exact amount.

"It's no fun to pay your own attorney, but it's even worse to pay your opponent's attorney," said Salem.

Oklahoma is among the nation's most conservative states, and many residents support the recent Republican-backed measures. But with the state facing a $1.2 billion budget deficit, some residents have questioned whether now is the right time to be picking legal fights.

"They're spending millions of state dollars defending these things for someone to basically have a small headline in the newspaper, and in the long run it will mean absolutely nothing except a lawsuit," said University of Oklahoma art professor Eric Anderson, who said he's worried about possible furloughs at the school amid looming budget cuts. "It's absolute demagoguery."

Some Republicans are conflicted over the collision between their conservative ideology and their party's mantra of fiscal restraint. But supporters of the new laws remain undeterred.

"Ever since I've been here I've heard great legal minds in the Senate talk about the fact that our job is to propose legislation, to argue the merits of it and whether it's good policy," said Senate President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee, R-Oklahoma City. "It's the court's job to determine if it's constitutional."

A bitterly debated anti-immigration bill approved three years ago is still tied up in litigation, with a federal appeals court ruling this month that two provisions in the law are not enforceable.

Coffee and House Speaker Chris Benge vowed to attack the new federal health care overhaul through the Legislature after Attorney General Drew Edmondson, a Democratic candidate for governor, declined to challenge it.

A bill being considered this session would authorize the death penalty for child rapists — a penalty that was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in a Louisiana case two years ago. And last year, lawmakers passed a bill calling for a Ten Commandments monument to be placed on the state Capitol grounds. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the placement of a similar monument on the Capitol grounds in Texas, but ruled unconstitutional a Ten Commandments display in Kentucky.

Tom Daxon, a former budget director under Republican Gov. Frank Keating and former chairman of the Oklahoma Republican Party, said lawmakers should only pick legal fights they think they can win. He praised lawmakers for taking a stand on important GOP issues like the federal health care bill and abortion, but he warned that fighting too many lawsuits could backfire.

"If it's a matter of having two or three of these challenges a year, that's just not that significant," Daxon said. "If we have a situation where we're fighting constitutional battles on 20 bills, that could become a significant factor, and an especially significant factor given the budget situation."

Eds: CORRECTS firearms veto to Tuesday, not last week, and abortion bills override to this week, not last week.

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Bronco:

 

While I realize some have such strong positions on abortion that they don’t care if those two bills get challenged.  In fact, I’m actually interested in those bills.  The article should not be perceived to be just about abortion but I will address that in a minute.

 

What the article is about is the continued writing of purposefully unconstitutional bills that are being used to demonize Oklahoma Dems (which are more conservative than many states republicans) and inflame the masses when it comes to voting.  

 

Now the point of the article to me is the following:

 

1.      There are way more bills being written unconstitutionally than taxpayers deserve. Why is that. 

 

The article states “The number of lawsuits challenging state statutes has jumped each of the past three years — with 15 cases filed in 2007, 18 in 2008 and 24 last year. Most cases are handled by the Attorney General's Office, which didn't have an estimate of the number of hours it has spent defending such challenges. But the state sometimes hires outside counsel, as was the case with one lawyer who billed the state $90,000 to defend it against two lawsuits challenging other abortion laws that ultimately were overturned.”

 

Notice the amount of unconstitutional bills (or least ones being challenged) ever increasing?  Now you mention abortion.  You realize this is the third go around on these abortion bills that have been stricken down procedurally the past few years.  You cannot tell me these legislatures do not know how to write a procedurally correct bill.  So why?  Well, we finally are getting to one that may be on the merits here in 2010 (an election year for governor) all the while republicans will decry the “liberal” governor and “liberal” judges when in fact its been their own fault. Yet people will not realize these bills were written purposefully this way to get votes by the leadership. 

 

What is sad is many elected reps and senators do not realize this and blindly go along with leadership.  If you dare step outside the leadership’s will you will get a primary opponent funded by the Chamber and/or demonized and essentially not allowed a single bill to be heard of yours. 

 

The simple answer is this. Its about votes!

 

2.      Proof that its about the Votes?

 

Senator sykes is a prime example of it being about the votes with his bill “being considered this session would authorize the death penalty for child rapists — a penalty that was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in a Louisiana case two years ago. “  He gets to go to constituents and talk about how hard he is on rapists yet there is no chance this bill withstand constitutional mustard and instead its about votes. 

 

Oklahoma is in one of its worst budget crunches in years.  Instead of focusing on the economy and budget this is the focus of the legislature. Why?  It’s a voting year is why!   What better way to get votes than to pass “morals” bills that will appeal to the masses knowing they will be rejected by the Courts and guess what?  You get to bring them up every year thus using the “liberal” and “activist judges” argument that holds sway with voters.

thanks Jthur...

Probably all it would take is a cleverly devised campaign to bring these points out and it would probably curtail much in the future. If I were Henry or with the democratic hiearchy, that is exactly what I would do...

thankfully for this state, I'm not...

THats the problem, the OKlahoman will not expose republicans as their editors are tied hand in foot with the chamber and will not allow this to happen. Journalism is at its lowest point in this state.  Lastly, voters in this state have sadly become more reliant on one or two issues (as discussed above purposefully brough about every year) and take those and run. 

It's called precedent. You may think that courts rule willy nilly, but at the top levels, they're actually very, very consistent and well-reasoned. They won't just turn 180 degrees at the drop of a hat.

 

 

I know it's an election year, but I think our State Congress spends its time pandering instead of making law ALL THE TIME. I really don't think they know their job. My Representative is actually pretty damned brilliant Constitutional scholar about my age. He tells me he thinks that the majority of the Oklahoma house LITERALLY believe that the Supreme Court is not the arbiter of the U.S. Constitution. They believe that the SCOTUS can't tell them what to do, and I think they believe their job is to show the rest of the U.S. (and their own constituents) that they won't be pushed around.

Additionally, my Rep says it seems like they think this is a new thing and people are making the current paradigm of Constitutionality up, even though it's been going for over 200 years - since Marbury v. Madison.

While there are a few misguided souls up there don't confuse innocense or stubborness in this instance.  The leaders of the state's Republican party do the bidding of the State chamber.  Try to close a tax loophole for one of the big ones and watch your cash dry up and someone try to primary you. 

I don't believe for a second that the leadership does not do this purposefully.  Its time for oKlahoma to wake up. The best way imo is to shake up the governors race and not elect the chosen one Mary Fallin.