“Create a dedicated system of business courts to handle commercial disputes, modeled on Delaware and Texas.”
Sources (click to view full provenance)
Propose an edit to this promise's details
Suggest a sourced correction to the promise text, topic, scope, significance, or dates. Changing the promise text requires a source. Your suggestion is reviewed before it changes the record.
Sign in and complete the Contributor Agreement to propose an edit.
Assessments
evidence-backed verdictsThese are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.
All three cited sources are reachable and each documents THIS promise (a dedicated Delaware/Texas-style business court system) with the quoted text confirmed verbatim. The PRIMARY source (Governor's own newsroom) shows Stitt actively promoting and defending SB 632, with his attorneys delivering oral arguments before the Oklahoma Supreme Court in support of the law — the phrase "Business courts are a game-changer for Oklahoma, so of course the old guard is panicking" appears exactly. FOX 25 confirms SB 632 passed the legislature, is set to start 2026 with divisions in OKC and Tulsa, and carries the same verbatim quote. The McCarville Report confirms the Oklahoma Supreme Court struck the law down on improper-delegation / separation-of-powers grounds, halting a system scheduled for 2026, and explicitly states Stitt "championed this measure." The leadership bar for CHAMPIONED is met: the sources show executive leadership (governor's office promoting, attorneys defending in court, third source calling him the measure's champion) plus his signing/driving the bill — far beyond a single vote or passive support. The invalidation by the judiciary (outside the governor's control) means functioning courts never materialized, which is why confidence is appropriately moderate at 0.75 rather than higher; it does not undercut the documented leadership. Rating upheld.
Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)
Sign in to vote.
Discussion
community opinionsComments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.
Sign in to join the discussion.
Propose a correction
community accountabilitySee an error in the promise text, status, significance, or missing source? Submit a sourced correction — a reviewer will evaluate and apply it if accurate. Your submission must cite evidence; unsourced changes are not accepted.
Sign in or create an account to propose a correction.
Debate
sourced community argumentsThese are sourced community arguments — not StumpWatch assessments. Each cites a source and is community-contributed; it does not change the official status or rating above.
No arguments yet
Be the first to weigh in. Every argument cites a source and is reviewed before it publishes. Create an account to add one and help keep this promise honest.
Add a sourced argument
Cite a source for your point. Submissions are held for reviewer approval before they appear.
Sign in or create an account to add an argument.