# In Re Initiative Petition No. 364

> Supreme Court of Oklahoma · December 10, 1996 · 67 O.B.A.J. 3874

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9633301

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re INITIATIVE PETITION NO. 364, State Question No. 673
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** December 10, 1996
- **Citations:** 67 O.B.A.J. 3874; 930 P.2d 186; 1996 OK 129; 1996 Okla. LEXIS 144; 1996 WL 709162
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Hargrave
- **Judges:** Kauger, Lavender, Simms, Ala, Watt, Summers, Wilson, Hodges, Hargrave
- **Cited by:** 18 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9633301

## Opinion text

HARGRAVE, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case. A plain reading of Article 5, Section 1, of the Oklahoma Constitution reserves to the people the right to propose an amendment to the Constitution and to vote on the adoption or rejection of the same. I find no impediment to the people amending the Constitution for the purpose of making a statement therein. Neither do I find the proposal so facially infirm as to strike it, at this time, from a submission to the people. I would treat this proposal as any other proposed act of legislation and, if and when it is adopted, at that time determine its constitutionality in the presentment of a proper case. I would let the people complete their attempt to use the reserved right of the initiative process.
I AM AUTHORIZED TO STATE THAT CHIEF JUSTICE WILSON CONCURS IN THIS VIEW.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9633301. Public record. Not legal advice.