Ryan Walters at the nexus of Oklahoma lawsuits over transparency, religious freedom
State Superintendent Ryan Walters gives the Oklahoma flag salute during a meeting of the Oklahoma State Board of Education on Feb. 27 in Oklahoma City. An Oklahoma County lawsuit accuses Walters' administration of violating state transparency laws. It was filed a day after Walters himself initiated an unrelated lawsuit. (Photo by Nuria Martinez-Keel/Oklahoma Voice)
OKLAHOMA CITY — In a litigious week for Oklahoma's top education official, state Superintendent Ryan Walters has both sued and been sued by advocacy groups.
The Oklahoma Appleseed Center for Law and Justice filed a lawsuit on Tuesday against Walters, his administration and the state Board of Education in Oklahoma County District Court.
The lawsuit accuses the Oklahoma State Department of Education of violating open meetings laws and of improperly withholding records detailing Walters' Library Media Advisory Committee.
In an unrelated matter, Walters sued the Freedom From Religion Foundation on Monday in Muskogee federal court, complaining of the cease-and-desist letters the Wisconsin-based organization has sent to Oklahoma schools over alleged violations of church-state separation.
'Oklahoma will never be bullied by radical, out-of-state atheists who use intimidation and harassment against kids,' Walters said in a statement.
The two organizations have been involved in a court battle against Walters before. Both supplied attorneys to a pending lawsuit challenging Walters' purchase of Bibles with state funds and his mandate that schools teach from the Christian text.
Walters' lawsuit accused the Freedom from Religion Foundation of inhibiting religious freedom in Achille Public Schools when it discouraged the southeast Oklahoma district from having student-led prayer during morning announcements.
The foundation called the lawsuit frivolous and said it won't back down.
The civil suit filed against Walters on Tuesday was 'nothing more than a politically motivated attack,' Walters said in a statement through a spokesperson.
'These extremists are using the legal system to harass and obstruct progress in an effort to push their radical agenda,' Walters said.
Oklahoma Appleseed filed its case after the state agency failed to provide details of the formation, membership selection and activities of the Library Media Advisory Committee despite repeated requests, according to the lawsuit.
The Tulsa-based nonprofit requested that a judge order the Education Department to release the records and pay for the group's attorney fees.
The lawsuit also asked a judge to declare that the agency violated the Oklahoma Open Records Act and that the advisory committee broke the state's Open Meeting Act, which requires government boards to conduct their business in public view.
'This lawsuit is about government transparency and accountability,' Oklahoma Appleseed legal director Brent Rowland said in a statement. 'The public has a right to know who is making decisions affecting its public schools. Oklahomans have a right to expect that their government will follow the law regarding open records and open meetings.'
The Education Department has said it doesn't view the advisory committee as a 'public body' subject to open meeting laws.
'The Library Media Advisory Committee is a volunteer-based group responsible for reviewing books for suitability to minor students based on content,' the agency's open records office wrote to Oklahoma Voice on Dec. 17 in response to a request for documents. 'Please note that this committee is exempt from the Open Meetings Act, as it does not have decision-making authority or engage in formal deliberations. It does not meet the legal definition of a 'public body,' as it does not conduct meetings or engage in decision-making activities. Its role is solely advisory, and it is not supported by, nor entrusted with the management of, public funds or property.'
Walters formed the advisory committee in 2023 to review whether certain books are age-appropriate for schools or whether they violate state rules against sexual content.
Following the committee's recommendation, the Education Department ordered Edmond Public Schools to remove the best-selling novels 'The Kite Runner' and 'The Glass Castle' from its high school libraries. Edmond appealed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, who decided that local schools, not the state Education Department, have control over what books to keep on their library shelves.
Walters and his administration have refused to disclose the names of the advisory committee members but one — out-of-state social media personality Chaya Raichik, who runs an account known as Libs of TikTok.
Raichik and the Library Media Advisory Committee also are named as defendants in the Oklahoma Appleseed lawsuit.
'(The state Education Department) will not be bullied by extremist organizations trying to weaponize the courts and remains committed to transparency and compliance with all legal requirements,' Walters said.
The state agency has denied multiple requests from news media, including Oklahoma Voice, to identify the rest of the committee's members.
Email records the agency provided to Oklahoma Voice were heavily redacted to cover up individuals' names. The Education Department's open records office has so far refused to cite a state law requiring that these names be kept confidential.
Oklahoma Appleseed contended these records should be available to the public with 'narrowly tailored and legally justified redactions.'
'In this instance, the state Department of Education has formed a Library Media Advisory Committee to make decisions about students' access to books when our state Supreme Court has determined those decisions should be made by local school boards,' Rowland said. 'State officials cannot hide behind closed doors and avoid public accountability, and why would they want to?'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
26 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
Remembering Tiananmen Massacre, Activists Look to the Day of CCP's Fall
WASHINGTON—Activists held a memorial vigil Wednesday evening to pay tribute to pro-democracy protesters who died at China's The day, which saw Chinese authorities use tanks and guns to kill The occasion serves as a chance to commemorate those killed in the 'horrific' event, said Eric Patterson, president and chief executive officer of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, who hosted the vigil. But more than that, he saw a reason for hope. 'We recall that in Romania, and Hungary, and Poland, and many other countries, the lies and lawlessness of communism did fall by the wayside,' he said. What happened to these communist regimes makes him hopeful that 'there will be a new day in China at some point in the future.' Rushan Abbas, executive director of the Washington-based advocacy group Campaign for Uyghurs, said that the 1989 incident showed what the Chinese 'regime was capable of doing.' 'Today, depression flows through black cells in Tibet, the streets of Hong Kong, and the concentration camps in Xinjiang,' Abbas said at the vigil. Related Stories 6/4/2025 6/3/2025 'China's long black arm even reaches us here in the land of the free and the home of the brave through threats and transnational repression that crosses borders. 'The CCP's methods change, the targets shift, but the goal stays the same: obedience without truth, silence without peace, prosecution without accountability,' she added. 'While the CCP quietly works to replace the freedom and democracy of this authoritarian rule, the world has been trained to treat its abuses as background noise.' In retaliation against Abbas's advocacy on Beijing's mistreatment of Uyghurs, Chinese authorities 'Let's honor those who lost [their lives] with a vision for a better world, one where there is accountability for the tragedy in Tiananmen Square, and the justice for Uyghurs, Tibetans, Chinese dissidents, Hongkongers, Campaign for Uyghurs founder Rushan Abbas speaks during an event commemorating the Tiananmen Square massacre that happened in China on June 4, 1989, at the Victims of Communism Memorial in Washington on June 4, 2025. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), marking the day, introduced a bill to use sanctions and legal tools to address the Chinese regime's censorship and to protect U.S. citizens and legal residents from Chinese agents' intimidation. 'Outlive the CCP' Rowena He, a historian and author of the book 'Tiananmen Exiles: Voices of the Struggle for Democracy in China,' was a student in China's southeastern city of Guangzhou at the time of the massacre. She returned to campus the next day wearing a black armband in mourning, she shared, and was told by the teacher that if she didn't take it off, 'no one will protect you.' Hong Kong held a large-scale vigil to commemorate the anniversary every year Remembering what happened in 1989 matters to more than the victims and participants in the protests, she told The Epoch Times. Rowena He, senior research fellow at Civitas Institute, speaks during an event commemorating the Tiananmen Square massacre that happened in China on June 4, 1989, at the Victims of Communism Memorial in Washington on June 4, 2025. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times 'The truth is still not revealed, and justice is not done,' she said. The cover-up the regime deployed around the Tiananmen Square incident happened again during the COVID-19 pandemic, when medical doctors wanted to warn about the virus's danger, she noted in her speech. It 'became the violation of human rights of every single human being on Earth,' she said. 'So don't tell me that human rights and Tiananmen [are] about them, about China. It's about here. It's about us. It's about now.' Piero Tozzi, staff director of the bipartisan Congressional-Executive Commission on China, said the massacre was a lesson of what the world could have done. 'The nature of the regime revealed itself 36 years ago—that's the same regime that is in power today,' Tozzi told The Epoch Times. 'The difference, though, is that they're far more powerful, economically, militarily.' In 2000, Congress passed legislation to give China permanent most-favored-nation status, now known as permanent normal trade relations, which paved the way for China's accession to the World Trade Organization. The status opened the U.S. market to Chinese products with trade advantages, including reduced tariffs. 'There was a chance to really break the regime, but we bailed them out,' Tozzi said. And now, 'that monster has grown.' Piero Tozzi, staff director of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, at an event commemorating the Tiananmen Square massacre that happened in China on June 4, 1989, at the Victims of Communism Memorial in Washington on June 4, 2025. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times 'Right now, it is an existential threat, not just to the United States but to the world.' Frances Hui, who was granted U.S asylum in September 2021, said that she was once 'baked into the national pride of China' before finding out about the massacre when she was 10 years old. The 1989 incident opened her eyes, Hui told The Epoch Times. 'I realized, wow, like in China, actually that many years ago, people longed for a democratic China, and just like us, like Hongkongers, we're fighting for it, all this time,' she said. Hui is now the advocacy coordinator for the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong (CFHK) Foundation. Hongkongers had tried to remember through the vigil, and now that it's banned, the rest of those in the free world need to 'carry on that responsibility, to keep remembering this day,' she said. 'Because as long as we remember it, one day justice will come, although it's obviously a delayed justice.' David Yu, board chairman of the June 4th Massacre Memorial Association, noted that although the Chinese regime may seem powerful, it currently faces many internal problems that are 'irreconcilable.' David Yu, executive director of the June 4th Massacre Memorial Association, speaks during an event commemorating the Tiananmen Square massacre that happened in China on June 4, 1989, at the Victims of Communism Memorial in Washington on June 4, 2025. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times 'They are being suppressed, and you don't see them,' he told The Epoch Times. It's only a question of time before these issues explode, he said, 'and the day when they explode isn't that far away.' Yu ended his speech by expressing conviction about the CCP's eventual collapse, and Hui echoed him, expressing belief that she will 'outlive the CCP.' 'There's no forever for any governance, and I believe that authoritarians will only lead to one end, which is the end of them,' Hui said. 'So we need to prepare for it.'
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ocasio-Cortez endorses Zohran Mamdani for NYC mayor as campaign enters final stretch
NEW YORK — Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is endorsing Zohran Mamdani as her top pick for New York City mayor, giving the socialist upstart candidate a major boost as the 2025 race for City Hall kicks into high gear. Ocasio-Cortez, who has since being elected to Congress in 2018 become one of the Democratic Party's most prominent progressive leaders, said in an interview published Thursday she's backing Mamdani because of the grassroots support he has generated in pushing a policy platform centered around affordability. 'Assemblymember Mamdani has demonstrated a real ability on the ground to put together a coalition of working-class New Yorkers that is strongest to lead the pack,' Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., told The New York Times. 'In the final stretch of the race, we need to get very real about that.' Ocasio-Cortez's campaign didn't immediately return requests for comment. The Ocasio-Cortez endorsement was highly coveted in the June 24 mayoral primary, as she's considered the city's chief left-wing leader and regularly ranks as the Democratic Party's most popular member. Her stature as a national figure has only increased since President Donald Trump returned to the White House, as she and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders have embarked on a nationwide tour of anti-Trump rallies that each tend to draw thousands of attendees. Like Ocasio-Cortez, Mamdani, a Queens Assembly member, is affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America. They're also both millennials — Ocasio-Cortez is 35 and Mamdani is 33 — and their western Queens-based districts overlap. 'In Washington, the Congresswoman has been a tireless advocate for working people as she has led the fight against Donald Trump. That's exactly the kind of leadership we will deliver to New York,' Mamdani said in a statement accepting her endorsement. It wasn't immediately clear if Ocasio-Cortez plans to join Mamdani on the campaign trail or appear in ads with him. As first reported by the Daily News last month, Ocasio-Cortez met privately in recent weeks with Mamdani and City Comptroller Brad Lander, another mayoral candidate, to discuss endorsements. Her pick of Mamdani marks a disappointment for Lander, a longtime ally who was endorsed by Ocasio-Cortez for his 2021 comptroller run. Given that the June 24 primary is ranked choice, Ocasio-Cortez said she's urging New Yorkers to back a slate of candidates on their ballots. But she put Lander third on that slate, giving the No. 2 spot to Council Speaker Adrienne Adams. She also put ex-Comptroller Scott Stringer in the No. 4 slot and Brooklyn state Sen. Zellnor Myrie in No. 5. Asked for comment, a spokeswoman for Lander, who has mostly polled as the No. 3 candidate in the race, pointed to a tweet he put out saying he's 'proud' to have her support. The Mamdani nod from Ocasio-Cortez comes as he has emerged as the progressive standard-bearer in the Democratic mayoral primary, pushing a platform that includes promises to freeze the rent for the city's stabilized tenants, drastically expand fully subsidized child care and make public buses free. He has consistently polled as the No. 2 candidate in the race behind front-runner Andrew Cuomo, a centrist Democrat. Some recent polls are indicating Cuomo's lead over Mamdani is narrowing, and Ocasio-Cortez said in the interview she hopes her endorsement will help beat back Cuomo, blasting him as a career politician who 'belongs to the hedge funds,' a reference to his wealthy donor base. At the same time, Mamdani has faced scrutiny in some corners of the city's electorate over his lack of executive experience (his only elected job is serving in the State Assembly since 2021) as well as his outspoken criticism of Israel's war in Gaza. Ocasio-Cortez acknowledged Mamdani's youth and hard-left stances on certain issues could pose an obstacle in seeking support from some communities, saying 'trust can't be built quickly.' But she also said she 'made my expectations of the assemblymember quite clear' in conversations with him before the endorsement. 'As someone who got elected when I was 28 years old, I know very intimately what it means to be trusted with an enormous job of immense responsibility at a very young age,' she said. 'It is not something that I take lightly.' _____
Forbes
43 minutes ago
- Forbes
Supreme Court Sides With Catholic Group In Tax Exemption Dispute Over Non-Religious Activities
The Catholic Charities Bureau provides services to the poor, the disadvantaged, the disabled, the elderly and children with special needs. In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a Catholic organization qualifies for a tax exemption even though its operations were not primarily religious. The decision overturned a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling. Under Wisconsin law, certain religious organizations may be exempt from paying taxes, including unemployment compensation taxes. This is similar to laws in other states that provide exemptions based on specific criteria. In other words, tax-exempt status for federal income tax purposes doesn't always translate to state income or other tax exemptions. In this case, Wisconsin law exempts any 'church or convention or association of churches' an services provided '[b]y a duly ordained, commissioned or licensed minister of a church in the exercise of his or her ministry or by a member of a religious order in the exercise of duties required by such order.' The exemption also covers nonprofit organizations 'operated, supervised, controlled, or principally supported by a church or convention or association of churches,' but only if they are 'operated primarily for religious purposes.' Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. (CCB) and four related organizations sought an exemption because they are separately incorporated from the Diocese, but claim federal tax-exempt status under the Roman Catholic Church's group tax exemption (this 'umbrella' treatment is common in the tax-exempt world). The Wisconsin Supreme Court denied the exemption, finding that CCB and the related organizations were not 'operated primarily for religious purposes because the charitable services went beyond theology. The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed, finding that drawing those lines violated the First Amendment. The Catholic Charities Bureau has, it says on its website, provided 'services to the poor, the disadvantaged, the disabled, the elderly and children with special needs as an expression of the social ministry of the Catholic Church in the Diocese of Superior' for more than 100 years. Today, CCB boasts more than 50 programs serving more than 10,500 people—services are not limited by race, color, national origin, or religion. That apparently innocuous distinction was one of the arguments used by the state against CCB. The organization's activities did not qualify as 'typical' religious activities because they serve and employ non-Catholics. The state also found that CCB does not 'attempt to imbue program participants with the Catholic faith,' and its services to the poor and needy could also be provided by secular (non-religious) organizations. Congress enacted the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) in 1935 to provide benefits to unemployed workers. The FUTA tax rate is 6% on the first $7,000 paid to employees during the year and is paid by all employers unless they qualify for an exemption. Notably, FUTA exempts church-controlled religious organizations 'operated primarily for religious purposes' from paying unemployment tax, the result of an exemption granted by Congress in 1970. Since then, 47 states have adopted language that is identical to, or nearly identical to FUTA's language. FUTA tax may be offset by credits of up to 90% for state unemployment taxes paid—all states have complementary statutes that impose, at a minimum, the coverage mandated by federal law. This tax is only paid by employers, not employees. The tax funds unemployment programs. (CCB noted in its petition that employees have separate unemployment coverage. Wisconsin bishops previously created the Church Unemployment Pay Program (CUPP) 'to assist parishes, schools, and other church employers in meeting their social justice responsibilities by providing church funded unemployment coverage.') CCB applied for an exemption under state law. The Department of Workforce Development determined that CCB and its sub-entities were not primarily operated for religious purposes and denied the exemption. CCB appealed, and after a hearing, the administrative law judge reversed the decision. However, the Labor and Industry Review Commission reversed the reversal (stay with me), finding that the exemption turns on an organization's 'activities, not the religious motivation behind them or the organization's founding principles.' Since CCB provided secular (non-religious) services, the Commission concluded that they do not qualify for an exemption The matter went to court (outside of the administrative channels) and ended up in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which held on March 14, 2024, that CCB's 'activities are primarily charitable and secular' and not religious, which means it would not qualify for the exemption. CCB filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court in May of 2024. Parties do that when seeking a review of the case—typically, it's in response to another court decision. In that petition, CCB noted that in the 1980s, the U.S. Supreme Court granted review in two cases (St. Martin Evangelical Lutheran Church v. South Dakota and California v. Grace Brethren Church) to determine whether the imposition of state unemployment taxes on certain religious organizations under the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) and related state statutes violated the First Amendment. But, CCB argued, while those cases were resolved, the Court expressly declined to answer the First Amendment questions, resulting in a split among courts. If the Supreme Court decides to hear a matter, it's called a grant of certiorari—by practice, at least four justices must vote to hear the case to be granted cert. Usually, cert is granted in a case of considerable importance or one involving a split. A split happens when courts disagree on a matter of federal law, reaching different conclusions about its application—that's what CCB argued happened here. In its petition, the questions presented by CCB were: The state argued that no split of authority existed on the constitutional question and further contended that the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision does not directly conflict with the decisions of any federal circuit or state high court. The Supreme Court disagreed with the state, granting certiorari in December of 2024. The scope of the case was, however, limited to Question 1. (Does a state violate the First Amendment's Religion Clauses by denying a religious organization an otherwise-available tax exemption because the organization does not meet the state's criteria for religious behavior?) Dozens of amici curiae briefs were filed before the decision. When it comes to legal issues before the Supreme Court, those with an interest or expertise in the subject but who aren't a party to the litigation may also file briefs to explain their point of view. These briefs are called amicus briefs and are filed by a party known as an amicus curiae, which translates to "friend of the court.' The U.S. Supreme Court determined that the Wisconsin Supreme Court's interpretation of the statute violated the First Amendment by discriminating against religious organizations based on their methods of religious expression. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for the Court, 'A law that differentiates between religions along theological lines is textbook denominational discrimination.' She went on to write that CCB would, under the state's interpretation, qualify for the exemption 'if they engaged in proselytization or limited their services to fellow Catholics.' However, CCB's Catholic faith, however, bars them from doing exactly that. That means, she explained, that eligibility for the exemption 'ultimately turns on inherently religious choices.' While the state argued that the exemption was intended to draw stark theological lines, Sotomayor went on to write that the exemption 'functions at an organizational level, covering both the janitor and the priest in equal measure.' The Court acknowledged the importance of the government maintaining 'neutrality between religion and religion.' But, Sotomayor wrote pointedly, 'There may be hard calls to make in policing that rule, but this is not one.' With that, the Wisconsin Supreme Court case was overturned. The news was welcome by the Diocese. 'At the heart of Catholic Charities' ministry is Christ's call to care for the least of our brothers and sisters, without condition and without exception,' said Bishop James Powers, Bishop of the Diocese of Superior. 'We're grateful the Court unanimously recognized that improving the human condition by serving the poor is part of our religious exercise and has allowed us to continue serving those in need throughout our diocese and beyond.' 'Wisconsin shouldn't have picked this fight in the first place,' said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, who represented CCB. 'It was always absurd to claim that Catholic Charities wasn't religious because it helps everyone, no matter their religion. Today, the Court resoundingly reaffirmed a fundamental truth of our constitutional order: the First Amendment protects all religious beliefs, not just those the government favors.' The Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Justice Sotomayor delivered the unanimous opinion for the Court, while Justices Jackson and Thomas filed concurring opinions. The case is Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc., v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission (No. 24–154).
