New legal challenges filed against latest OSDE proposal for Bible-based lessons
OKLAHOMA CITY (KFOR) — The Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE) is facing new legal challenges over its latest proposal seeking to integrate Bible lessons into public elementary school social studies classes.Last month, OSDE announced it was issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) 'seeking qualified suppliers' to create worksheets and assignments that would 'integrate biblical principles and character education' into social studies lessons for elementary students.
$3 million could go from OSDE payroll to 55,000 Bibles
OSDE announced the new RFP while in the middle of fighting a lawsuit over a previous Bible-related RFP issued last year, which sought a supplier to provide tens of thousands of Bibles for public school classrooms.Alex Luchenitser, Associate Vice President of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, represents a group of 32 Oklahoma parents, teachers, and faith leaders who filed the lawsuit.'It's unlawful to spend state funds on these purposes,' Luchenitser said. 'It violates the Oklahoma Constitution. It violates the religious freedom of parents and students. It should be up to parents to decide what their children learn about religion.'When OSDE announced the new RFP for Bible-based lessons, his group took issue with it.
OSDE looking to buy Bible lessons for Oklahoma elementary students
'The State Department of Education have no authority to select and purchase specific instructional materials for school districts because under the state statutes, local school districts have the right to choose their curricula and their curricular materials,' Luchenitser said. 'The state doesn't have any right to choose those materials for them.'They have now added the new RFP to their lawsuit, filing a brief with the Oklahoma Supreme Court on Tuesday asking the court to issue a stay that would block OSDE from moving forward with the RFP for Bible lessons.They also requested the court to grant a similar stay sought by the Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES).OMES is the state agency responsible for implementing RFPs on behalf of state agencies.
When a state department, like the OSDE, requests an RFP, OMES puts it out for bid and selects a supplier.However, in its own legal filing, OMES told the court it was concerned about assisting OSDE with any new Bible-related RFPs due to the ongoing lawsuit and the possibility of similar legal challenges.
GOP Sen. Markwayne Mullin: Letting Oklahoma public school educators teach the Bible is a 'slippery slope'
OMES asked the court to issue a stay allowing them to hold off on helping with the Bible-based lessons RFP at least until the lawsuit over Bible purchases RFP is resolved.'I think where they're coming from is that they don't want to be in the position of doing something that might ultimately be determined to be illegal,' Luchenitser said. 'And that's certainly a very sensible and reasonable position for them.'The court has not yet made a decision.Meanwhile, Luchenitser says he remains confident his group's arguments will ultimately prevail in court.'These latest Bible and biblical instruction request for proposals are a clear violation of the Oklahoma Constitution,' Luchenitser said. 'They clearly violate the separation of church and state. They clearly violate the religious freedom of parents and students. And that's why we are asking the Oklahoma Supreme Court to block these latest efforts to spend state funds unlawfully.'News 4 reached out to OSDE on Tuesday for comment from Superintendent Ryan Walters.He did not respond.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
28 minutes ago
- New York Post
FTC could bar Omnicom, Interpublic from boycotting sites over political views as merger condition: report
The Federal Trade Commission could reportedly bar advertising giants Omnicom and Interpublic from suppressing ads to websites over their political views as a condition for approving their pending merger. The FTC, led by President Trump-nominated chairman Andrew Ferguson, is considering imposing the consent decree as it engages in a broader effort to investigate and stop collusive ad boycotts that unfairly target conservative media. New York City-based Omnicom was among the companies called out by House Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) over its involvement with the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, a left-leaning advertising cartel that allegedly sought to defund news outlets and platforms, including The Post. Advertisement 3 The FTC is currently reviewing a $13.25 billion all-stock deal between the two ad giants. Bloomberg via Getty Images Jordan launched an investigation into Omnicom after the merger was first announced last December. The FTC is currently reviewing a $13.25 billion all-stock deal between the two ad giants. Advertisement If approved, the combined entitles would form the largest ad agency in the world, with around $25 billion in annual revenue. The terms of the merger deal are still under review and have yet to be finalized, Reuters reported on Thursday, citing a source familiar with the matter. Representatives for the FTC, Omnicom and Interpublic did not immediately return The Post's request for comment. 3 The Omnicom and Interpublic merger deal was first announced in December. REUTERS Advertisement The FTC's move points 'to a much more highly politicized environment for agencies than we have ever seen before, at least in the United States,' analyst Brian Wieser wrote in a midyear industry update on Tuesday that was cited by the New York Times, which first reported on the proposed consent decree. Fergson has said that any boycotts organized by advertisers can be illegal because they involve coordinated refusals to do business, which may restrict competition. Earlier this week, the FTC requested documents from top ad agencies, including Omnicon, Interpublic, WPP, Dentsu, Havas and Publicis, as part of a broad review into whether the firms had violated antitrust law by participating in boycotts against certain news outlets. The FTC is also targeting so-called watchdogs like Media Matters and Ad Fontes Media in the investigation and in May requested documents about their dealings with a dozen firms, the Wall Street Journal reported. Advertisement 3 Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Andrew Ferguson, testifies during a House Committee on Appropriations – Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government on a oversight hearing of the US Federal Trade Commission on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on May 15, 2025. AFP via Getty Images The probe is focused in part on how the firms dealt with Elon Musk's X, which suffered a mass exodus of advertisers after the mogul bought the social media company formerly known as Twitter in 2022 and loosened its content moderation practices. The agency's letter to Media Matters requested 'all documents that Media Matters either produced or received in discovery in any litigation between Media Matters and X Corp. related to advertiser boycotts since 2023.' Last year, Musk filed a sweeping antitrust lawsuit against the World Federation of Advertisers and its now-defunct GARM initiative, which shut its doors after the suit was filed. X CEO Linda Yaccarino told The Post at the time that the entire online advertising ecosystem was 'broken' as a result of the alleged boycotts. 'We were victimized by a small group of people pushing their authority or ability to monopolize what gets monetized,' Yaccarino said. With Post wires
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
21 bills still waiting on decision by Gov. Stitt
OKLAHOMA CITY (KFOR) – Governor Kevin Stitt still has to make a decision on 21 bills that made it to his desk by the end of session. During the session, the Governor has five days to sign or veto a bill. Now that the session is over, he will have until June 14 to take action on the remaining bills. 'He can sign them. He can do a direct veto or he can do a pocket veto, which is basically where he just holds on to it and it doesn't become law,' said Sen. Julia Kirt (D-Oklahoma City). Kirt said it was not unusual for a few remaining bills to be waiting on the Governor's signature after the session concludes. But the way legislators wrapped up the final days, with chaotic overrides on 47 vetoes, has some lawmakers worried. Lawmakers override majority of Gov. Stitt's vetoes Lawmakers also voted to oust Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services Commissioner Allie Friesen, who was handpicked by Stitt. 'I wouldn't be surprised if he'd veto some things just because he's upset with the Senate or upset with the House or specific members,' said Kirt. Stitt announced an interim preplacement to lead the department on Tuesday. He tasked retired Rear Admiral Gregory Slavonic with the job. Among the 21 bills, five deal with public education. Senate Bill 235 is one of them. It included a match of $5 million to the state's 'Grow Your Own' program. The program would help school districts grow their teacher pipeline by paying for their certification. 'You are taking dedicated paraprofessionals, teacher's aids, and other support staff personnel who have been in that district – some of them maybe for two decades – and they're on a path to teacher certification,' said Sen. Adam Pugh (R-Edmond). House Bill 1727 is another one. It would modify and fund 'Oklahoma's Promise' to allow college scholarships for children of state teachers.'If their kid goes to Oklahoma, a higher ed institution for them to get Oklahoma Promise even if they don't qualify financially,' said Kirt. 'It's, I think, meaningful to educators to know they'd have that option.'Here is a list of the remaining 21 bills waiting on Governor Stitt's desk: SB 130 – Directing Corporation Commission to conduct certain feasibility study subject to certain process. SB 140 – Creating the Oklahoma Math Achievement and Proficiency Act. SB 207 – Establishing the Oklahoma Rare Disease Advisory Council. SB 235 – Providing grant application process, funding for the Grow Your Own Educator Program. SB 1039 – Modifying grounds for certain denials for medical marijuana license. HB 1087 – Extending the amount of classroom instruction time; minimum salary schedule for teachers. HB 1166 – Annexation of territory without consent of majority of owners. HB1282 – Oklahoma Rising Scholars Award; remaining; eligibility; awards; waivers. HB1287 – Authorizing the Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma to create a math tutoring pilot program for certain students. HB 1378 – Sales tax exemptions for agriculture, including timber. HB 1486 – Designating various memorial roads and bridges. HB 1727 – Oklahoma Higher Learning Access Program; eligibility for children of certain teachers. HB 2104 – Classification of felony offenses HB 2262 – Alzheimer's Dementia and Other Forms of Dementia Special Care Disclosure Act. HB 2513 – Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services; addressing the consent degree. HB 2610 – Nonrecurring adoption expenses credit. HB 2645 – Practice of medicine, tax credit. HB 2646 – Revenue and taxation; adjustments; wagering, tax year. HB 2752 – Eminent domain of electricity, facilities on private property. HB 2753 – Rural Jobs Act. HB 2758 – Preserving and Advancing County Transportation Fund. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Federal trial alleging illegal racial gerrymandering in Tampa Bay Senate seat concludes
The front of the federal courthouse in Tampa on June 12, 2025 (Photo by Mitch Perry/ Florida Phoenix) A panel of three federal judges is now weighing whether a Tampa Bay state Senate district created in 2022 was the result of illegal racial gerrymandering. A four-day trial over the district concluded on Thursday afternoon and judges must decide whether the constitutional rights of voters in Hillsborough and Pinellas counties were violated when the Legislature created the Senate district in 2022 that crossed from St. Petersburg over the water to Hillsborough County. Florida was sued by three voters who are represented by the ACLU of Florida and the Civil Rights & Racial Justice Clinic at New York University School of Law. The plaintiffs allege that the Legislature's plan to connect Black populations from parts of Hillsborough and Pinellas counties violated their equal-protection rights by unjustifiably packing Black voters into District 16 and removing them from nearby District 18, reducing their influence there. The defendants, Senate President Ben Albritton and Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd, have denied that claim, saying that the maps were lawfully drawn up and previously approved as legally sound by the Florida Supreme Court. But the defense's arguments go beyond refuting the plaintiffs' claims. Indeed the defense went on the offense both before and during the trial to allege that the ACLU of Florida's lead attorney in the case, Nicholas Warren, worked behind the scenes with Democratic House and Senate staffers to try to get a partisan map approved. To bolster that argument, attorneys representing the state called Matthew Isbell to the stand (remotely) on Thursday, their last witness. Isbell is a Tallahassee-based data analyst and consultant who has worked with Democrats and Democratic-affiliated groups over the past decade. Text and direct Twitter messages between Isbell and Warren were displayed to the court showing how both men hoped that the Senate would adopt a map that kept Pinellas County intact and separate from Hillsborough County. Warren drew his own map that kept the two counties separate and introduced it before the redistricting committee in late 2021, without identifying himself as being a staff attorney for the ACLU of Florida. Sen. Ray Rodrigues, who was chair of the Senate Committee on Reapportionment at the time, subsequently sent a memo to all 40 state senators accusing him of violating Senate rules by not disclosing that he was with the ACLU of Florida. Warren testified earlier this week that he drew the map on his own personal time and resources, and that the Senate forms that needed to be completed to appear before the committee did not require an individual to list his employer. Isbell testified on Thursday that he believed that the GOP-majority Legislature's motivation to split the city of St. Petersburg up was motivated by partisan politics, an allegation that attorneys for the Florida Senate president's office have strongly refuted. After Isbell's video appearance concluded, the closing statements began, starting with the plaintiffs. Warren declared that 'race predominated in the drawing of the district.' In terms of direct evidence to back up that statement, Warren played a video clip from a November 2021 committee hearing. The excerpt shows Orange County Democratic Sen. Randolph Bracy asked Senate Committee on Reapportionment staff director Jay Ferrin why the newly proposed Senate District 16 district had to cross from St. Petersburg over into Tampa Bay and Hillsborough County. Ferrin replied that it was to comply with the Fair Districts amendment in the Florida Constitution, specifically the 'Tier 1' standards which provide protections for racial and language minorities. Bracy then asked Ferrin if there was a way to configure the district to comply with the Fair Districts amendment and still keep the two countries separate. Another video exchange showed Pasco County Republican Danny Burgess,telling Bracy that Senate 'staff' had said keeping the counties separate wasn't possible, because it would lead to a 'significant number of voters who would be disenfranchised.' At the time Burgess was the chair of another Senate committee that also dealt with reapportionment. Ferrin agreed with Burgess, saying it would result in a'wide diminishment' that would ultimately disenfranchise Black voters in Pinellas County. Bracy followed up asking how much the Black vote would be diminished by if the counties were to remain separate. Ferrin replied 'close to 30%,'and added that such a reduction 'would constitute diminishment.' That comment, Warren said in his closing, revealed that race placed a major role in why Senate District 16 was created. The defense came back with closing statements from the two attorneys representing their side: Daniel Nordby, who was representing Ben Albritton in his official capacity as president of the Florida Senate, and Mohammad Jazil, who was representing Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd. Nordby said the plaintiffs had to prove that race was a predominant factor in the creation of Senate District 16, but that they fell short. 'Plaintiffs have not come close to doing so,' Nordby said. He emphasized how Ferrin had recognized the constitutional requirements for drawing up districts – which is that districts should be compact, and when possible, utilize existing political and geographic boundaries. Ferrin did, Nordby said, noting that Ferrin used important boundaries such as I-275, the Hillsborough River, and 22nd Avenue North in St. Petersburg, a major artery, when configuring the Senate district. Nordby acknowledged that race was a consideration, because 'it had to be,' noting that to ignore that would be ignoring part of the state constitution. Nordby also dismissed the three alternative maps drawn up for the plaintiffs by Pennsylvania State University professor of statistics Cory McCartan that keep Hillsborough and Pinellas counties separate. And he then addressed the peculiar situation regarding Warren, saying, 'This case is an odd one.' Nordby asserted Warren had essentially 'laundered' his map through the alternative presented during the trial by McCartan. He also questioned why none of the lawmakers that plaintiff attorneys had indicated could be witnesses in the case – Sen. Darryl Rouson, House Democratic Leader Fentrice Driskell and most notably former Bracy, the 'alleged lynchpin' for the plaintiff's case, never showed up. Bracy was a scheduled witness but failed to appear earlier in the week, much to the disappointment of the ACLU attorneys. When contacted by phone on Tuesday by a representative from the three-judge panel, Bracy said he hadn't seen the subpoena until that very day and said that he had already told plaintiff attorneys that he did not intend to show up. Burgess and Rodrigues cited legislative privilege in declining to appear, according to the court. Representing Byrd,Jazil said all of the proposed Senate maps that the ACLU had presented during the trial were examples of partisan and racial gerrymandering, and cited his text messages to House and Senate staffers involved with the reapportionment process. In response to their closing arguments meanwhile, Daniel Tilley, another attorney with the ACLU of Florida, noted how no lawmaker had testified. Tilley said all of the attention focused on Warren was a 'contrived kerfuffle' that found no evidence to support the idea that members of the Senate were influenced by his map. It was, he surmised, a 'spectacular failure.' During the four-day trial there were hours of detailed descriptions by experts that dealt with how to draw legislative districts that were logically configured and not oddly shaped. The Florida Senate District 16 seat is held by Rouson, who resides in St. Petersburg. Several Tampa-based constituents in the district complained earlier in the trial that he was not as accessible to meet in Hillsborough County, though defense attorneys said he has district offices in the county in Tampa and Brandon. The three-judge panel that will decide the case includes two of them who are Trump appointees. The panel was led by Andrew L. Brasher, who serves in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Accompanying him was U.S. Senior District Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell and U.S. District Judge Thomas P. Barber, both of whom serve on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Brasher and Barber were appointed by Trump during his first term as president in 2019. If they rule in favor of the plaintiffs, their hope would be that the Florida Senate could create and approve a new map of the district in time for the 2026 election. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
