One could argue that Drummond’s loss was shaped by the forces surrounding St. Isidore’s and Glossip.
People often say that A.G. is short for “Aspiring Governor.” That was the case in Oklahoma, where Attorney General Gentner Drummond ran for the Republican Gubernatorial Primary. The AP has now called the race, and Drummond trailed by less than a point.
I typically avoid commenting on political races, yet Drummond deserves some heat.
First, Drummond contended that his own state’s charter-school program violated the Constitution. He brought St. Isidore before the Supreme Court, where the outcome was a tie, leaving the lower court’s decision intact. President Trump even cited this case in his social-media endorsement of Drummond’s opponent: “He even SUED to BLOCK a religious based charter school strongly supported by my Administration — Very troubling for Educational Freedom, and an outright attack on Christianity!”
Second, Drummond hired his lifelong friend to review the capital conviction of Richard Glossip. Drummond then petitioned the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals to overturn the death sentence. The court declined to revisit the case. In the end, the Supreme Court ruled that the OCCA had misinterpreted federal law. There were so many problems with that case. But even more troubling, as my colleague Paul Cassell pointed out, is Drummond’s own conduct. Justice Thomas wrote in his dissent that Drummond “collusively excluded . . . highly relevant evidence” from the record.
To add insult to injury, Drummond also seemed to support McGirt‘s controversial decision by Justice Gorsuch. Based on the electoral map, Indian country appeared to vote strongly against Drummond.
As the returns stand now, only 2,000 votes separate Drummond and his opponent. I’d like to think that some of those votes are due to the positions Drummond took before the courts.
