Oklahoma leaders give their “Two cents” on Ten Commandments

By Robin Dorner
Editor in Chief

In a 7-2 decision, the Oklahoma Supreme Court decided Tuesday the “Ten Commandments” monument located on state property at the Oklahoma State Capitol violated Article 2, Section 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution, citing no public money or property can be directly or indirectly for the “benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion.”

Gov. Mary Fallin's representatives say she is talking to Attorney General Scott Pruitt about the state's legal options for the ordered removal.

Rep. Mike Sanders, R-Kingfisher in a press release about the decision:“Our country is under assault from an unelected judiciary that is continuously trying to force cultural change upon us. First, we had the U.S. Supreme Court counter a long tradition of marriage law this month. Now the Oklahoma Supreme Court is going against higher court rulings on the use of Ten Commandment monuments, saying the Capitol monument is unconstitutional. We cannot and will not stand for this. This is pure evil winning in our state and country.”

Rep. Kevin Calvey, R-Oklahoma City, said several legislators, including Sanders, are calling for the officials’ impeachment. Sanders said that is not true.

“I’m not going after their heads or impeachment,” Sanders said in a phone interview with the AP. “I’m just disappointed that the judges continue to legislate from the bench instead of interpreting the law.” Sanders included his thoughts that the Supreme Court is arbitrarily changing the laws they should be interpreting.

Attorney General Scott Pruitt released this statement on the ruling by the Oklahoma Supreme Court: “Quite simply, the Oklahoma Supreme Court got it wrong. The court completely ignored the profound historical impact of the Ten Commandments on the foundation of Western law. Furthermore, the court’s incorrect interpretation of Article 2, Section 5 contradicts previous rulings of the court. In response, my office will file a petition with the court for a rehearing in light of the broader implications of this ruling on other areas of state law. In the interim, enforcement of the court’s order cannot occur. Finally, if Article 2, Section 5, is going to be construed in such a manner by the court, it will be necessary to repeal it.”

Most Rev. Paul S. Coakley, Archbishop, Archdiocese of Oklahoma City: “The Supreme Court’s decision to remove the Ten Commandments monument from the Capitol grounds ignores its historical significance in the formation of our state and as an ancient law code having prominence at the place where lawmakers work to enact wise and just laws. The Court's dismissal of these established facts is deeply concerning and disappointing."

Since it was erected in 2012, the monument has been the center of controversy. The religious monument was paid for by private money. Last year, the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) filed suit, stating “the monument violated state-and-church provisions.”

Other groups have since requested placing their own monuments on capitol property, but their requests were denied. Last year, the monument was struck by a car in a “hit-and-run,” but the perpetrator was caught and the monument rebuilt.

Pruitt said his office will file a petition for rehearing the case “in light of the broader implications of this ruling on other areas.”

Copyright 2015, The Gayly. Published on 7/1/2015 at 2:00am