As Global Tensions Rise, Oklahoma Moves to Protect Constitutional Freedoms

International headlines have been dominated by escalating tensions between the United States and Iran. Iranian state media broadcast an explicit assassination threat against President Donald Trump, warning that “This time it will not miss the target.” This menacing message underscores a fracturing geopolitical landscape and raises deep concerns about threats to American leadership and stability.

Image From Fox News

All of this has taken place simultaneously to the recent Broken Arrow city council rejection of an Islamic Mosque development in Oklahoma.

Amidst these global developments — are fundamental rights like **women’s freedoms, free speech, and personal liberty are being routinely suppressed by theocratic governance — Oklahoma lawmakers say it’s time to take steps to safeguard the liberties guaranteed by the U.S. and Oklahoma Constitutions here at home.

That effort has taken legislative shape in House Joint Resolution 1040 (2026), a proposed state constitutional amendment filed by Oklahoma State Representative Gabe Woolley (R‑Broken Arrow) & co-authored by State Senator, David Bullard (R-Durant), designed to ensure that no foreign legal doctrine, including Sharia law, can influence Oklahoma courts.

What Is HJR 1040 and Why Now?

House Joint Resolution 1040 is a measure that would amend the Oklahoma Constitution to explicitly prohibit the application or consideration of foreign law in state courts. Supporters argue this is necessary to prevent any legal system — especially one they view as incompatible with constitutional protections — from impacting judicial decisions in Oklahoma. If approved by the Legislature and by voters on a statewide ballot, the amendment would become part of the state constitution.

Rep. Woolley describes the resolution as a defense of core American values:

“Our Constitution protects women’s rights, free speech, freedom of expression and many other fundamental freedoms,” he said. “Sharia law does not protect or respect those rights. This foreign religious law and political structure directly contradicts our Constitution.”

Woolley further emphasized that with shifting global dynamics — illustrated by threats from authoritarian regimes — now is the right moment to reinforce constitutional safeguards:

“With a new administration and 16 years having passed, I believe it is time to attempt this ban once again to protect our American way of life in Oklahoma,” he said. “We have seen what is happening in Dearborn, Michigan, New York, Texas and Europe. Oklahoma does not want to become the next Dearborn, Michigan.”

Connection to Rising Global Threats

Supporters of the resolution are tying this effort to broader reflections about freedom under oppressive regimes like Iran’s. They point out that Iranians continue to struggle for basic rights in the face of government crackdowns — and that threats against U.S. leadership highlight the ongoing ideological battle over who governs and on what terms. For many backers, defending constitutional freedoms in Oklahoma is part of a larger commitment to the principles that distinguish the United States from authoritarian rule abroad.

They argue that ensuring domestic laws are rooted exclusively in constitutional governance is one way to reaffirm commitment to individual rights at a time when such values are under threat elsewhere in the world.

A Second Attempt After the 2010 Effort

This is not Oklahoma’s first effort to address foreign legal influence. In 2010, Oklahoma voters approved a ballot measure known as the “Save Our State Amendment” (State Question 755), which would have prohibited state courts from considering Sharia law or international law. That amendment passed with over 70% of the vote — reflecting broad public support at the time.

However, despite the strong electoral mandate, the amendment never took effect. Shortly after the election, a federal lawsuit was filed arguing that the measure violated constitutional protections, including the First Amendment’s Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses. A federal district court blocked certification of the amendment, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld that ruling in 2012, finding that the amendment likely unconstitutional because it singled out a particular religion for unfavorable treatment.

Although the language won overwhelming support from voters, the judicial ruling prevented it from becoming part of the state constitution. Now, more than a decade later, lawmakers are seeking a refined, constitutionally sound approach to address the same concerns.

How HJR 1040 Works: From Legislature to Ballot

The process for adopting a constitutional amendment in Oklahoma involves several key steps:

1. Introduction in the Legislature: HJR 1040 was filed ahead of the Second Regular Session of the 60th Oklahoma Legislature, which began in February 2026.

2. House and Senate Approval: The resolution must be passed by both the Oklahoma House of Representatives and the Oklahoma Senate.

3. Statewide Vote: Because it proposes a constitutional amendment, it then goes to Oklahoma voters on a statewide ballot. Only if a majority of voters approve it does the amendment become part of the Oklahoma Constitution.

This three‑tiered process ensures that constitutional changes are vetted by both legislators and the public before they take effect.

A Call to Thoughtful Engagement

As international tensions — including major threats and human rights struggles in nations like Iran — continue to dominate global discourse, Oklahoma’s lawmakers are asking residents to engage in the debate about how best to protect constitutional rights domestically.

Rep. Woolley has urged Oklahomans to stay informed, participate in public hearings, and prepare to make their voices heard at the ballot box if HJR 1040 reaches the voters. Such engagement is not just civic duty but a defense of the freedoms many around the world are still struggling to secure.

Oklahomans are being asked to consider how best to uphold constitutional liberties in a rapidly changing world — one marked by threats to democracy abroad and vigorous debate at home.

Additionally, a petition has begun circulating online that seeks to not allow the use or sale of any Oklahoma land to groups or individuals tied to terrorist organizations or those shown to be linked to such groups.

These efforts are both reactive and proactive in addressing concerns about Sharia law in Oklahoma. Oklahomans will have the opportunity to decide whether they want to defend their state’s sovereignty from foreign ideologies and political systems that are being presented as religious liberties under the deceptive Trojan horse of “freedom of religion,” which threaten our American way of life.

---

This is an editorial article based on a combination of opinions, research, and personal experiences.

Like & Follow The Oklahoma Lion Media On Facebook and Twitter / X