Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
OKLAHOMA COUNCIL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, INC., Douglas P. Beall, M.D., Jonathan S. Small, II, and Jennifer Witherby, R.N., Petitioners/Protestants, v. Kelly SMALLEY and Erin Taylor, Respondents/Proponents.
ORDER
¶1 Oral argument was held on June 18, 2019, concerning a challenge to the sufficiency of the gist and the constitutionality of Initiative Petition 419, State Question 802, pursuant to 34 O.S. Supp. 2015 § 8 (B) & (C). We find that the challenge to the gist's use of 133% in determining eligibility for the proposed Medicaid expansion is not misleading and is sufficient. In McDonald v. Thompson, we stated that “[b]y its very nature, the gist is a simple statement that summarizes the petition.” 2018 OK 25, ¶ 12, 414 P.3d 367, 373. We believe the language of the gist is clear. The gist informs signers of what the proposed amendment is intended to do—“expand Oklahoma's Medicaid program to include certain low-income adults between the ages of 18 and 65 whose income does not exceed 133% of the federal poverty level, as permitted under the federal Medicaid laws.” (emphasis added).
¶2 The remaining challenges to the constitutionality of Initiative Petition 419, State Question 802, are also denied.
CONCUR: Gurich, C.J., Darby, V.C.J., Kauger, J., Reif, S.J., Thornbrugh, S.J. and Swinton, S.J. CONCUR IN PART; DISSENT IN PART: Winchester and Combs, JJ. and Bell, S.J. Combs, J., with whom Winchester, J. and Bell, S.J., join, concurring in part; dissenting in part: “I concur with the majority that the Protestant's constitutional challenges to Initiative Petition 419 are meritless. However, I dissent to its ruling that the gist is sufficient. The use in the gist of 133% of the federal poverty level rather than the more accurate 138% is misleading to signatories and therefore the petition should be stricken on that basis alone.” RECUSED: Edmondson and Colbert, JJ.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 117,962
Decided: June 19, 2019
Court: Supreme Court of Oklahoma.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)