Does the Oklahoma appellate judiciary decide cases based on economic philosophy?

Abstract

In 1997 business groups evaluated Oklahoma's appellate judiciary on whether or not its decisions were pro- or anti-economy. The resulting scorecards were widely distributed by the Christian Coalition dining the 1998 judicial retention elections and sparked a campaign against some judicial candidates. These judicial scores attracted considerable media attention both in Oklahoma and nationally. A careful analysis finds judges and justices are recorded as participating in cases before they joined their courts or after they left, among other errors. Judges with very different scores are found, often as not, to reach identical decisions when deciding the same cases. Overall, there is no evidence Oklahoma appellate judges and justices are imposing economic philosophies in decisions.