2010 Oklahoma State Question 755

January 2025 State Question 755 Save Our State Amendment 695650 296944 992594 File:2010 Oklahoma State Question 755 results map by county.svg County results Yes #28497C 80–90% 1px #AAAAAA solid #47729E 70–80% 1px #AAAAAA solid #7D9CBB 60–70% 1px #AAAAAA solid State Question 755, also known as the Save Our State Amendment, was a legislatively-referred ballot measure held in the U.S. state of Oklahoma on November 2, 2010, as part of the 2010 Oklahoma elections. The ballot measure was intended to amend the Oklahoma state constitution to ban the use of Sharia law (law derived from Islamic scripture), and international law (such as international agreements and treaties), from being used by courts within the state. Sharia law had not previously been used in Oklahoma, with the ballot measure being promoted as a "pre-emptive strike". The ballot measure was used by conservatives in the state to motivate their base and increase their voter turnout. The ballot measure passed with over 70% of the vote, and Oklahoma Republicans defeated many Democrats in the simultaneous state elections, especially in rural areas. However, despite its electoral victory, the ballot measure never went into effect. Soon after the amendment passed, Muneer Awad, a local member of the Council on American–Islamic Relations, filed a federal lawsuit claiming the amendment violated his rights under the Establishment Clause. A federal court agreed and struck down the amendment. Continued legislative efforts in 2011 and 2012 to introduce a similar amendment were unsuccessful. Background Following the September 11 attacks in 2001, anti-Muslim sentiment became more common in the United States. Sharia law, derived from Islam, came under increasing scrutiny, especially as Sharia law as practiced in many countries authorizes severe punishments for acts such as adultery and the consumption of alcohol. However, Sharia law can exist as a source of ethical inspiration for individual Muslims, in line with the Quran, and applying Sharia principles for that purpose does not necessarily entail a radical legal system.696–697 In 2010, Muslims were a small share of the state's population,Islamic Sharia Law to Be Banned in, ah, Oklahoma https://abcnews.go.com/US/Media/oklahoma-pass-laws-prohibiting-islamic-sharia-laws-apply/story?id=10908521 18 December 2025 ABC News enRiccardi Nicholas Measure would outlaw Islamic law in Oklahoma -- where it doesn't exist https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-oct-28-la-na-sharia-oklahoma-20101029-story.html 27 October 2025 Los Angeles Times 28 October 2010 https://web.archive.org/web/20250119093040/https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-oct-28-la-na-sharia-oklahoma-20101029-story.html January 19, 2025 live with the Oklahoma Council on American–Islamic Relations estimating that between 15,000 and 30,000 Muslims lived in the state.Judge extends ban on Oklahoma's anti-Islamic law https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AL5FK20101122/ December 18, 2025 Reuters November 22, 2010 A few cases in the 2000s in the United States where Sharia law played some role were also cited by opponents of Sharia law.698 Most famously,698 in 2010, a woman in New Jersey was denied a restraining order against her husband after she alleged that he raped her; her husband argued that he was acting in accordance with his religious beliefs in forcing her to have sex. This ruling was issued even though there was sufficient evidence present to prove sexual assault.698 The ruling was quickly overturned,698 but it gained significant national attention, and inspired Oklahoma lawmakers to pursue a ban on the use of Sharia law in their state. After the amendment passed, Oklahoma's solicitor general, Patrick R. Wyrick, cited this case as part of his attempt to defend the amendment in court. right 3 350px Vote on third reading in the Oklahoma House of Representatives 350px Vote on third reading in the Oklahoma Senate 350px Vote on fourth reading in the Oklahoma House of Representatives 350px Vote on fourth reading in the Oklahoma Senate #3868d1 Democrat yea #78acff Democrat nay #ccd3ff Democrat excused (not voting) #c53030 Republican yea #ffcccc Republican excused (not voting) Legislative history The amendment was introduced as House Joint Resolution 1056 in the Oklahoma House of Representatives. State Representative Rex Duncan was the primary author of the amendment, with Mike Reynolds, Ann Coody, Sue Tibbs, David Derby, Sally Kern, Randy Terrill, John Enns, Mike Christian, George Faught, Lewis H. Moore, and Charles Key as coauthors in the House, and with Anthony Sykes and Randy Brogdon as coauthors in the Oklahoma Senate.2 Duncan argued the ban would be a "pre-emptive strike against Sharia law" as Oklahoma would be the first state to enact such a ban.Schlachtenhaufen Mark Sharia law, courts likely on 2010 ballot https://www.normantranscript.com/edmond/sharia-law-courts-likely-on-2010-ballot/article_769e3baf-5fb8-5b9c-9dff-5bea567c5007.html April 13, 2024 Edmond Sun June 4, 2010 en Sykes also brought up comments Elena Kagan made during her Supreme Court nomination where she expressed an openness to considering international law while hearing cases. The resolution was first voted on in the House on March 10, 2010, passing 91–2 on its third reading, with 8 absences.House Joint Res 1056 - Third Reading Oklahoma House of Representatives March 10, 2010 https://former.okhouse.gov/52LEG/okh02156.txt October 25, 2025 live https://web.archive.org/web/20251025021205/https://former.okhouse.gov/52LEG/okh02156.txt The measure then passed the Senate on April 20 by a margin of 40–5, with 3 absences.House Joint Res 1056 - Third Reading Oklahoma Senate April 20, 2010 https://www.oksenate.gov/sites/default/files/votes_documents/votes_2010/02475.pdf March 1, 2025 live https://web.archive.org/web/20250301223240/https://www.oksenate.gov/sites/default/files/votes_documents/votes_2010/02475.pdf The resolution went back to the House for its fourth reading on May 18, where it passed 82–10, with 9 absences;House Joint Res 1056 - Fourth Reading Oklahoma House of Representatives May 18, 2010 https://former.okhouse.gov/52LEG/okh02856.txt October 25, 2025 live https://web.archive.org/web/20251025021309/https://former.okhouse.gov/52LEG/okh02856.txt it was again approved by the Senate on May 24 by a margin of 41–2, with 5 absences.House Joint Res 1056 - Fourth Reading Oklahoma Senate May 24, 2010 https://www.oksenate.gov/sites/default/files/votes_documents/votes_2010/02716.pdf March 2, 2025 live https://web.archive.org/web/20250302104534/https://www.oksenate.gov/sites/default/files/votes_documents/votes_2010/02716.pdf Contents The state legislature named the proposal the "Save Our State Amendment" and sent it to the state's ballots with the following ballot title:3–4 This measure amends the State Constitution. It would change a section that deals with the courts of this state. It would make courts rely on federal and state laws when deciding cases. It would forbid courts from looking at international law or Sharia Law when deciding cases. The proposal would add the following text to the Section 1 of Article VII of the state constitution:2–3https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol59/iss2/3/ The Unconstitutionality of Oklahoma's SQ 755 and Other Provisions like It That Bar State Courts from Considering International Law 59 2 2011 189–217 Cleveland State Law Review Venetis Penny M.192 The Courts provided for in subsection A of this section, when exercising their judicial authority, shall uphold and adhere to the law as provided in the United States Constitution, the Oklahoma Constitution, the United States Code, federal regulations promulgated pursuant thereto, established common law, the Oklahoma Statutes and rules promulgated pursuant thereto, and if necessary the law of another state of the United States provided the law of the other state does not include Sharia Law, in making judicial decisions. The courts shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia Law. The provisions of this subsection shall apply to all cases before the respective courts including, but not limited to, cases of first impression. However, as the ballot title did not explain what Sharia law or international law were, Oklahoma attorney general Drew Edmondson deemed it inadequate and replaced it with a more explanatory ballot title.10 In Oklahoma, ballot titles are legally significant: ambiguity in ballot language can lead to amendments being struck down or otherwise litigated in state courts even if the text added to the state constitution is unambiguous.193 The proposal was therefore listed on ballots as follows:State Question Number 755 – Legislative Referendum Number 335 https://www.sos.ok.gov/documents/questions/755.pdf Oklahoma Secretary of State11–12 This measure amends the State Constitution. It changes a section that deals with the courts of this state. It would amend Article 7, Section 1. It makes courts rely on federal and state law when deciding cases. It forbids courts from considering or using international law. It forbids courts from considering or using Sharia Law. International law is also known as the law of nations. It deals with the conduct of international organizations and independent nations, such as countries, states and tribes. It deals with their relationship with each other. It also deals with some of their relationships with persons. The law of nations is formed by the general assent of civilized nations. Sources of international law also include international agreements, as well as treaties. Sharia Law is Islamic law. It is based on two principal sources, the Koran and the teaching of Mohammed. On August 9, governor Brad Henry officially placed the amendment on statewide ballots with the rewritten title.194 The amendment was numbered and listed on ballots as State Question 755 and as Legislative Referendum 355. Support and opposition The amendment was supported by most legislators, with only ten in the House and two in the Senate voting against the measure.Brown Trevor Islamic Sharia law ban raises questions, concerns https://www.normantranscript.com/islamic-sharia-law-ban-raises-questions-concerns/article_342322da-1ab0-5400-bba8-56df7d62f68f.html April 23, 2024 The Norman Transcript September 23, 2010 en All opponents in the House were Democrats, though 24 Democrats in the House supported the measure.The ten opponents were Wallace Collins, Ryan Kiesel, Al McAffrey, Anastasia Pittman, Wade Rousselot, Seneca Scott, Mike Shelton, Ben Sherrer, Jabar Shumate, and Cory T. Williams.Roll Call: OK HJR1056 https://legiscan.com/OK/rollcall/HJR1056/id/126915 LegiScan July 19, 2024 en 2010 ACT for America, a conservative advocacy group led by activist Brigitte Gabriel, strongly supported the measure, with Gabriel visiting the state to make multiple speeches in favor of the amendment.Weigel David Sharia, USA https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2011/04/sharia-questions-the-conservative-panic-about-muslim-laws-in-oklahoma.html April 23, 2024 Slate April 4, 2011 David Weigel The group's campaign efforts also included a minute-long radio ad – which cited the New Jersey rape case as a "chilling example of how Islamic Sharia law has begun to penetrate America", and robocalls from former CIA director James Woolsey.Ure Laurie Oklahoma voters face question on Islamic law https://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/10/28/oklahoma.sharia.question/index.html 25 October 2025 CNN November 1, 2010 https://web.archive.org/web/20250716015241/https://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/10/28/oklahoma.sharia.question/index.html July 16, 2025 en live The Tulsa Beacon, a conservative newspaper, endorsed the measure.Tulsa Beacon voting endorsements for the Nov. 2 Election https://tulsabeacon.com/?p=4736 April 23, 2024 Tulsa Beacon October 28, 2010 https://web.archive.org/web/20101031133032/https://tulsabeacon.com/?p=4736 October 31, 2010 dead Democratic state representative Cory Williams, one of the opponents of the measure, argued that it was unnecessary and singled out Muslims. Chris White, the executive director of governmental affairs of the Osage Nation, expressed concerns that the measure could undermine treaty rights established in U.S.–Native American treaties.Toensing Gale Courey September 13, 2018 October 26, 2010 Oklahoma lawmakers aim to ban international and Sharia law from state courts https://ictnews.org/archive/oklahoma-lawmakers-aim-to-ban-international-and-sharia-law-from-state-courts April 23, 2024 ICT News en Several religious groups also opposed the measure, with Saad Mohammed, the director of information for the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City, arguing that the measure was unnecessary and only targeted Muslims without a good reason. Many newspapers in the state opposed the measure. The Oklahoman opposed the amendment, describing it as an unnecessary "feel-good measure".Our SQ choices https://www.oklahoman.com/story/opinion/editorials/2010/10/17/our-sq-choices/61206293007/ April 23, 2024 The Oklahoman October 18, 2010 The Enid News & Eagle similarly opposed it, noting that state and federal law is already the only law used in Oklahoma.Our take on the state questions https://www.enidnews.com/opinion/our-take-on-the-state-questions/article_57bc0a08-c1ff-50f1-b461-148f9c18d468.html April 23, 2024 Enid News & Eagle October 18, 2010 en Tulsa World described the measure as bigoted,State questions http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=61&articleid=20101024_61_0_Eleven670211 April 23, 2024 October 24, 2010 https://web.archive.org/web/20101031135101/http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=61&articleid=20101024_61_0_Eleven670211 October 31, 2010 dead Tulsa World and The Oklahoma Daily described it as Islamophobic.OUR VIEW: State Questions 754, 755 http://oudaily.com/news/2010/oct/27/our-view-state-questions-754-755/ April 23, 2024 October 27, 2010 https://web.archive.org/web/20110920145156/http://oudaily.com/news/2010/oct/27/our-view-state-questions-754-755/ September 20, 2011 dead The Oklahoma Daily Polling SoonerPoll conducted polling on State Question 755, as well as other state questions, in July and October. Each poll found the measure leading by a significant margin. Poll source Datesadministered Samplesize Marginof error SupportQuestion 755 OpposeQuestion 755 Don't know/refusedSome polling results do not add up to 100% due to rounding. LeadSoonerPollKrehbiel Randy SQ 744 opposition rises http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=262&articleid=20101030_16_A1_CUTLIN207957 December 6, 2025 Tulsa World https://web.archive.org/web/20101101125512/http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=262&articleid=20101030_16_A1_CUTLIN207957 November 1, 2010 dead October 30, 2010October 18–23, 2010753 (LV likely voters)± 3.57%57%24%19%33SoonerPollOmnibus October 2010 https://assets-global.website-files.com/604a6284c2cf945575665724/6056b785ea0ff7bdee8f5c22_September-SoonerPoll-State-Race-and-Question-Complete-Results-and-Analysis.pdf SoonerPoll 6 December 2025 https://web.archive.org/web/20240524015339/https://assets-global.website-files.com/604a6284c2cf945575665724/6056b785ea0ff7bdee8f5c22_September-SoonerPoll-State-Race-and-Question-Complete-Results-and-Analysis.pdf May 24, 2024 4 October 13, 2010 liveOctober 3–7, 2010352 (LV likely voters)± 5.2%45%25%30%20SoonerPollKrehbiel Randy Education funding measure supported, Oklahoma Poll shows http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=19&articleid=20100805_16_A9_Amswhr19725 December 6, 2025 Tulsa World https://web.archive.org/web/20100910030823/http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=19&articleid=20100805_16_A9_Amswhr19725 September 10, 2010 dead August 5, 2010July 16–21, 2010755 (LV likely voters)± 3.57%49%24%27%25 Results The amendment was approved by 70% of voters. Support was high across the state, with more than 60% of voters supporting it in every county. The referendum, held alongside the other 2010 Oklahoma elections on November 2, was used as a wedge issue by Republicans in some races. Republicans campaigned against Cory Williams, a prominent opponent of the measure in the Oklahoma House, by sending out mail advertisements suggesting he supported using Islamic law in the state.McKinley, Jr. James C. James C. McKinley Jr. Oklahoma Surprise: Islam as an Election Issue https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/15/us/15oklahoma.html October 27, 2025 The New York Times November 14, 2010 https://web.archive.org/web/20230331140929/https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/15/us/15oklahoma.html March 31, 2023 live The referendum also succeeded in driving high Republican turnout, leading to many statewide and downballot victories, especially against more conservative Democrats from rural areas. Other conservative-aligned ballot measures also passed, including State Question 751, making English the state's official language. Question 755Election Night Results by County for 10/02/2010 https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/elections/election-results/2010-election-results/2010-general-election-results/ge-results-county-20101102.pdf Oklahoma Secretary of State 138–139 695650 296944 Aftermath Despite passing by a wide margin, the amendment never took effect due to legal challenges. Further efforts to pass a similar amendment were unsuccessful. Court proceedings After its passage, the amendment was scheduled to go into effect on November 9, when the election would be certified.703 However, on November 4,703 Muneer Awad, a local leader of the Council on American–Islamic Relations,Mears Bill Federal court blocks Oklahoma ban on Sharia https://www.cnn.com/2012/01/10/justice/oklahoma-sharia/index.html April 23, 2024 CNN January 10, 2012 en sued the Oklahoma State Election Board to stop the amendment from being enacted. He said that he wanted his estate to be dealt with under Islamic law, and that a ban on Islamic law would therefore violate his rights under the Establishment Clause703 of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.Hagerty Barbara Bradley Barbara Bradley Hagerty Court Strikes Down Oklahoma Shariah Ban https://www.npr.org/2012/01/10/144984595/court-strikes-down-okla-sharia-ban April 23, 2024 January 10, 2012 The case, Awad v. Ziriax, was filed against the state's election board as it was the entity responsible for certifying the results of the amendment. Awad was supported in his lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union.Banda P. Solomon Denver Appellate Court To Hear Islamic Law Case – CBS Colorado https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/denver-appellate-court-to-hear-islamic-law-case-2/ April 23, 2024 CBS News Associated Press September 12, 2011 A temporary restraining order was issued on November 9, preventing the amendment from going into effect while the court ruled on Awad's request for a preliminary injunction.703Awad v. Ziriax 754 F. Supp. 2d 1298 W.D. Okla. 2010 https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2603364546602589585 Vicki Miles-LaGrange, a judge for the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, issued a preliminary injunction on November 29, 2010.Mears Bill Judge issues permanent injunction on Oklahoma Sharia law ban https://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/29/oklahoma.sharia.law/index.html April 23, 2024 CNN en The injunction was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, where it was upheld on January 10, 2012.Awad v. Ziriax 670 F.3d 1111 10th Cir. 2012 https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4740311284453756960 The amendment was struck down in its entirety by Miles-LaGrange on August 15, 2013, with her finding that the law clearly violated the First Amendment.Awad v. Ziriax 966 F. Supp. 2d 1198 W.D. Okla. 2013 https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15683549890122015977 Oklahoma officials argued that only the Sharia prohibition in the law could be struck down, while leaving the rest intact, but Miles-LaGrange found that as most campaigning regarding the amendment focused on Sharia law, there was insufficient evidence that it would have been approved by voters without the Sharia prohibitions.Reilly Ryan J. Oklahoma Anti-Sharia Constitutional Amendment Struck Down By Federal Judge https://www.huffpost.com/entry/oklahoma-sharia-constitution_n_3764313 April 23, 2024 HuffPost August 15, 2013 en Legal analysis and impact For a preliminary injunction to be issued, the district court determined that three things would be necessary: Awad would need to have a "substantial likelihood of success" in challenging the amendment on constitutional grounds, he would need to be likely to suffer "irreparable injury" without an injunction, his injury would need to outweigh the injury that an injunction would impose on the state of Oklahoma, and the injunction could not be against the public interest.718 Given that Awad's request for a preliminary injunction would permanently prevent the enactment of the amendment, it was considered "disfavored" and held to a higher standard: he needed to show a "heightened burden" and a higher likelihood of success in challenging the amendment on its constitutional merits compared to what would typically be necessary.718–719 The district court then evaluated the Establishment Clause claims with the three-pronged Lemon test.The Lemon test, from the case Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), requires the following: that the legislation has a secular purpose, that its primary purpose or effect not be to advance or inhibit religion, and that the legislation must not result in "excessive government entanglement" with religion. Only legislation that is in accordance with all three prongs is constitutionally valid.713 The court found that the amendment likely violated both the "effect" and "entanglement" prongs of the Lemon test.719 The court also determined that the amendment likely violated the Free Exercise Clause, as it was not "narrowly-tailored" to a particular governmental interest and it was not facially neutral as it singled-out a particular religion for discrimination.719 The court also determined, without going into much detail, that Awad had demonstrated "irreparable injury", that the harm done to him by the violation of his constitutional rights was inherently more important than enacting the amendment, and that upholding Awad's constitutional rights was inherently in the public interest. Given these determinations, the court ruled in favor of Awad, enjoining the amendment from taking effect.720 Though the Tenth Circuit upheld the district court's ruling in the case, their legal reasoning was quite different.718 The court agreed that the injunction should be considered "disfavored" and held to a higher standard. It also agreed that Awad had demonstrated that he would suffer irreparable injury, that this outweighed Oklahoma's potential injury, and that the injunction was not in conflict with the public interest.720 However, their ruling regarding whether Awad had a high chance of winning the case on its constitutional merits was different. It generally ignored the Free Exercise claim, as they determined its analysis to be unnecessary as the law was in violation of the Establishment Clause. In that analysis, the court rejected the use of the Lemon test and instead invoked a test from Larson v. Valente (1982), a case cited much less frequently. The court determined that Lemon applied only to laws that would benefit all religions, not to laws that would discriminate between different religions. Because the amendment focused on Sharia law, it could, per the test in Larson, only be constitutional if it was "closely fitted" to address a compelling governmental interest. Given that the Election Board had failed to demonstrate any cases where Sharia law was actually used, the court determined that there clearly was no compelling governmental interest at play. Even if such cases did exist, a full ban on Sharia law would likely not be a "closely fitted" remedy.721 In the Denver University Law Review, Renee Sheeder described the amendment as "blatantly unconstitutional" as well as harmful to Oklahomans.812 In particular, state law cannot ban international law, as the federal government is authorized to enter into treaties that bind states.812 The amendment's strict bans on Sharia and international law would also prevent Oklahoma courts from considering decisions or referencing judgements courts in other states had made if those decisions had at all been influenced by Sharia or international law, potentially causing problems for dealing with cross-state disputes.813 She attributed the amendment's large margin of victory to a fear of Islam that was promoted by Republican politicians in the state,816 and praised the court for upholding the rights of religious minorities.823 thumb|Sally Kern (2011 official portrait). Kern attempted to pass a modified version of the amendment in 2011 and in 2012, but both of her bills died in the legislature. Continued legislative efforts Following initial legal challenges to the amendment, Sally Kern, a Republican member of the Oklahoma House, introduced House Bill 1552 in 2011. The bill intended to work around legal challenges by banning all religious and foreign law from being used in the state. The Oklahoma Council on American–Islamic Relations lobbied against this bill, arguing that it infringes on religious freedom and also threatens the validity of international business contracts.Schlachtenhaufen Mark CAIR-OK launches anti-Sharia bill campaign https://www.normantranscript.com/edmond/cair-ok-launches-anti-sharia-bill-campaign/article_6a0da76d-b265-5c37-aec9-48a65440ab38.html April 23, 2024 Norman Transcript March 18, 2011 en The measure passed by a 76–3 margin in the House, but did not progress in the Senate.Lawmaker plans to revise bill prohibiting Sharia law https://www.muskogeephoenix.com/news/oklahoma_news/lawmaker-plans-to-revise-bill-prohibiting-sharia-law/article_5c87a58a-ed41-5313-a817-b4608479435f.html April 23, 2024 Muskogee Phoenix Associated Press January 11, 2012 en subscription She reintroduced the bill in 2012, where it again passed the House, but was rejected 6–9 in the Senate's rules committee.Quazilbash Homa Update: Bill Banning Sharia Law In Oklahoma Killed In Committee https://ktul.com/archive/gallery/bill-banning-sharia-law-in-oklahoma-killed-in-committee?photo=1 April 23, 2024 KTUL April 5, 2012 en Notes References Grunert Jeremy April 8, 2013 How do you solve a problem like Sharia? Awad v. Ziriax and the question of Sharia Law in America Pepperdine Law Review 40 3 695–734 https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr/vol40/iss3/5/ Sheeder Renee January 2012 Awad v. Ziriax: The Tenth Circuit's defense against the power of religious majority factions Denver University Law Review 90 3 801–824 https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1227&context=dlr External links Category:2010 Oklahoma elections Category:2010 ballot measures in the United States Category:Oklahoma ballot measures Category:Anti-Islam sentiment in the United States Category:Foreign relations of the United States Category:International law Category:Islam in Oklahoma