Opinion ID: 4230358
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Motion to Dismiss Filed by Respondents Schultz and McCall

Text: ¶8 Oklahoma Senate President Pro Tempore, Senator Mike Schultz, and Speaker of the Oklahoma House of Representatives, Representative Charles McCall, were named as respondents by petitioners. These two respondents filed a response and motion to dismiss the action against them. They assert they are immune from petitioner's action, and they are correct. ¶9 Petitioners allege these two respondents in their official capacities violated the Oklahoma Constitution's single subject provision in passing SB 643. 14 In their response to the motion to dismiss, petitioners argue respondents' legislative immunity applies only to certain criminal charges and lawsuits seeking damages. They further argue without citation of authority: Because the legislators are the ones who passed the bill, it is only appropriate that they be made a party to the suit that seeks to have the bill voided. 15 We disagree with petitioners' interpretation of respondents' constitutionally granted legislative immunity. ¶10 The language of Oklahoma Constitution, Article 5 § 22 states: Senators and Representatives shall, except for treason, felony, or breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during the session of the Legislature, and in going to and returning from the same, and, for any speech or debate in either House, shall not be questioned in any other place. We have explained this language: The Speech or Debate Clause of the Oklahoma Constitution, Art. 5, § 22, absolutely protects legislators from suit calling for judicial inquiry into their performance within the sphere of legitimate legislative activity. 16 We added: Legislators may not be haled into court, either to account for acts that occurred in the course of legislative process or for judicial inquiry into their motivation for those acts. The legislative privilege has never been limited to words spoken in debate. The constitution's immunity shields all enactment-related conduct, whether a legislator be sued (1) personally, (2) in an official capacity, or (3) as the Legislature's leader. The line separating protected from unprotected legislative activity lies in the distinction between purely legislative activities and those that are nongermane political matters. Brock v. Thompson , 1997 OK 127, ¶ 14, 948 P.2d 287-288 (notes omitted). ¶11 Petitioners have haled into this Court these two legislators for the purpose of giving an account and defense for their participation in enacting a piece of legislation while serving in the Oklahoma Legislature. The petitioners' claim against these respondents does not fall within a listed exception in Okla. Const. Art. 5 § 22, but is based solely on petitioners' claim the legislation violates a provision of the State Constitution. ¶ 12 Senator Mike Schultz and Representative Charles McCall clearly possess immunity from the legal liability sought to be imposed by petitioners and they are dismissed as parties .