Can Oklahoma's attorney general boot governor from tribal gaming suit? Court to decide

A federal judge on Monday asked the Oklahoma Supreme Court to weigh in for the third time in four years on a series of tribal gaming deals signed by the governor in 2020.

The state’s highest court now needs to decide whether Oklahoma’s attorney general can jump into a long-running federal lawsuit tied to the compacts — and boot Gov. Kevin Stitt from the case.

Resolving who has the power to represent the state is a “vital issue” that could affect the outcome of the legal dispute, wrote the Washington, D.C. federal district court judge overseeing the case.

“The decision over who has the ultimate authority to represent Oklahoma’s interests in this case goes to the very core of its sovereignty,” U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Kelly said in a court filing. “Moreover, that interest is heightened given the differing views of Gov. Stitt and Attorney General Drummond on the merits.”

More: Lawmakers can renew tribal compacts over governor's objection, Oklahoma Supreme Court rules

The case stems from the governor’s efforts to negotiate standalone gaming deals with some tribes, outside of the model state-tribal gaming compact approved by voters in 2004. The governor criticized the model compact as unfair to the state soon after taking office in 2019.

Stitt soon signed on to separate compacts with the Comanche Nation, Kialegee Tribal Town, Otoe-Missouria Tribe and United Keetoowah Band.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down the compacts in a pair of rulings handed down in 2020 and 2021, deeming the deals invalid under state law.

Yet the compacts remain in limbo at the federal level, because federal gaming regulators did not formally reject them. The Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw and Citizen Potawatomi nations filed a federal lawsuit in 2020 to stop the compacts from taking effect.

Drummond moved to intervene in the case in July, describing Stitt’s continued defense of the compacts as a waste of state resources. The governor objected to Drummond’s request.

It’s not clear from Oklahoma’s constitution or its laws whether the attorney general can take the governor’s seat, Kelly said in a court filing explaining his decision to ask the Oklahoma Supreme Court to settle the question.

“The question of whether Attorney General Drummond can take and assume control of the defense of Oklahoma’s interests in this case over Gov. Stitt’s objection is one that involves a fundamental interpretive question of Oklahoma constitutional law affecting the very structure of Oklahoma’s government,” Kelly wrote.

In a statement, Drummond said he agreed the Oklahoma Supreme Court should resolve the question about his involvement in the case. “How the governor chooses to interact with the tribes is his prerogative, but he is not free to violate Oklahoma law," he said.

Stitt has not yet commented on the development, which lands less than a week after the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled on a separate dispute involving the governor and tribal compacts.

In that case, the court’s nine justices agreed the Legislature can pass laws renewing state-tribal compacts, rejecting Stitt’s arguments that doing so was unconstitutional.

Stitt has signed on to renewed tobacco tax compacts with several tribal nations in recent months, a marked turnaround from years of stalled negotiations. He announced late Monday that he had also reached an agreement to renew the state’s car tag agreement with the Choctaw Nation in southeast Oklahoma.

Editor's note: This is a developing story and will be updated.

This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: 4-year dispute over tribal gaming is headed to Oklahoma Supreme Court