OKLAHOMA CITY — Four attorneys filed a lawsuit challenging Oklahoma’s new drunken-driving law, saying it is unconstitutional because it denies due process to those faced with losing their licenses after a drunken driving arrest.
The lawsuit, filed Monday against Gov. Mary Fallin, state lawmakers, the state’s public safety commissioner and two prosecutors, asks that the case bypass lower courts and go directly to the state Supreme Court.
The measure signed into law by Fallin on June 8 which will take effect on Nov. 1 abolishes the appeals process for people trying to keep their licenses after being arrested for driving while intoxicated. Fallin later issued an executive order allowing for an administrative hearing if the Department of Public Safety plans to take a person’s license.
However, the lawsuit by filed by attorneys John Hunsucker, Charles Sifer and Stephen Fabian of Oklahoma City and Bruce Edge of Tulsa, who handle DWI cases, said the new law denies a person the right to due process.
While the governor’s attorney, James Williamson, said Fallin is authorized to issue an executive order, he declined comment on the pending lawsuit.
Fallin spokesman Michael McNutt said he could not yet comment on the legal action.
“We have not been served a copy of the lawsuit,” McNutt said.
The lawsuit said the law denies a person the right to due process by requiring an arresting officer to seize a person’s driver’s license and the public safety department to destroy it, said attorney Brian Morton, who represents the four plaintiffs.
The lawsuit also alleges the law violates the state constitution’s ban on bills containing more than one subject. Morton also said the order issued by Fallin after she signed the bill into law essentially is a veto of the measure.
“Through the executive order, she removed what the bill does” by allowing for a hearing if revocation of a driver’s license is being sought, Morton said.