Opinion ID: 1186189
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Oklahoma Attorney General's Opinions

Text: ¶ 27 With this as the background, Oklahoma's Attorney General was asked whether Oklahoma's statutory scheme regulating abortions was constitutional. [50] Because Oklahoma's requirements regarding where abortions could be performed were virtually identical to those in Akron, the Attorney General reasoned that Oklahoma's regulations were unconstitutional. [51] After the Attorney General rendered this opinion in 1984, the Department ceased enforcing sections 1-731 and 1-737 of title 63. ¶ 28 Then in 1991, the Attorney General was asked whether his 1984 opinion was binding on the Department. [52] The General answered that the 1984 opinion was advisory as to the Department, but the Department was bound to follow United States Supreme Court decisions and failure to do so could result in a loss of qualified immunity from liability. [53] The opinion concluded that the Department could follow the opinion but was not compelled to do so. [54]