Attorney for Wyrick: Court can’t review judicial appointment

An attorney for Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice Patrick Wyrick said Wednesday that no one has the authority to challenge a judicial nomination.

Wyrick was appointed to the high court by Gov. Mary Fallin to fill a vacancy. The Oklahoma chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union sued, arguing that Wyrick doesn’t meet the requirement that the appointee reside in a southeastern Oklahoma judicial district.

Wyrick claims residency in Atoka, but he has lived and voted in Cleveland County. Until his appointment, he was a top lawyer for the attorney general’s office.

The ACLU and Wyrick’s attorney, Neal Leader, debated parts of the case Wednesday at a preliminary Supreme Court hearing. Leader said the Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC), which included Wyrick in a list of three eligible candidates for the vacant position, has the final say after it reviews applications.

“The constitution thus forbids anyone, not the Legislature, not the courts, not the electorate, to take part in or interfere with the selection process,” Leader said. “Under the constitution, no one can step into the shoes of the commission, and no one is empowered to review or undo the commission’s decision. The final decision rests with the commission.”

Even then, he said, Wyrick still meets the residency requirements of the position.

The case against Wyrick was filed at the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which could pose an issue for the justices who are now asked to rule on his eligibility. The ACLU filed a request asking that any justice who has previously recommended Wyrick for a job recuse themselves from the case.

The arguments on Wednesday were made in front of a court official who will report the case to Oklahoma’s remaining eight justices. A ninth can be temporarily assigned from a pool of lower court judges if needed.

ACLU attorney Brady Henderson said the Supreme Court has the ability to review judicial appointments.

“Oklahoma’s constitution does not grant allpowerful status to anyone, except in a sense, the citizens themselves,” Henderson said. “In theory, if I were a 19-year-old foreign national citizen of Norway who had never been to law school, never set foot in Oklahoma and had a felony on my record, I could go sit on the Oklahoma Supreme Court as long as the JNC somehow didn’t notice.”

Leader called the ACLU’s lawsuit an attack on the commission, which reviews applications and orders background checks for all applicants before sending the governor three names.

“The commission did its job,” Leader said, adding that the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation also verified facts, talked to neighbors, gathered records and visited homes.

Henderson replied that there is no factual evidence showing what the OSBI investigated.

The ACLU wants the court to determine whether Wyrick meets the eligibility requirements and do so quickly. Henderson warned against booting the case to a lower court to sort through the facts of the case, which can be tedious.

“During that time, we could have literally dozens if not hundreds of cases decided with the participation of Justice Wyrick that then might be called into question,” he said.