SB 893 creates the “Military Installation and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act of 2025” and is aimed at limiting ownership, control, and access by “foreign principals” from designated foreign adversary countries. The bill bars those foreign principals from owning or acquiring agricultural land in Oklahoma above a narrow de minimis indirect-interest threshold, requires divestiture of existing holdings within 180 days, and requires registration with the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry. It also restricts foreign principals from purchasing, holding, renting, or otherwise controlling real property within 10 miles of military bases or installations, with similar divestiture and registration-related enforcement provisions.
The bill also extends to critical infrastructure and state infrastructure. It prohibits entities and governmental entities from entering into certain critical-infrastructure agreements with foreign principals from foreign adversary countries, requires companies seeking access to critical infrastructure to file a certification form and pay a fee, and directs the Attorney General to oversee compliance, revoke certifications, and establish a process for reporting non-notified foreign investment transactions. In addition, it bans certain software in state infrastructure if produced by federally banned corporations or by foreign adversaries, and requires removal and replacement of prohibited software.
The bill’s enforcement structure gives significant authority to the Attorney General and the Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry. It authorizes district-court actions, judicial foreclosure for noncompliant property, and invalidates conflicting deeds, contracts, rental agreements, and other agreements. It also creates a whistleblower referral system with a reward equal to 30% of sale proceeds after lienholders are paid, and it sets out the order for distributing proceeds from forced sales.
Overall sentiment appears strongly supportive and bipartisan, based on the bill’s unanimous or near-unanimous votes in the Senate and House, including 46-0 in Senate third reading and 85-0 in House third reading. The House committee vote on the amended version was 8-2, indicating some limited opposition at the committee stage, but the bill advanced with broad floor support. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record suggests general agreement on the bill’s national-security rationale.
The main points of contention likely center on the breadth of the foreign-ownership restrictions, the inclusion of military operating areas and a 10-mile buffer around bases, the invalidation of existing agreements, and the whistleblower reward and enforcement mechanisms. Potential concerns also include the administrative burden on landowners, companies, and state agencies, as well as the bill’s impact on foreign investment, agricultural transactions, and technology procurement for state infrastructure.
SB 893 would add new provisions to Title 60 and Title 74 of the Oklahoma Statutes governing foreign ownership of agricultural land and real property near military installations, as well as foreign involvement in critical infrastructure and state infrastructure software. It would require divestiture of certain existing holdings, create registration and certification requirements, authorize Attorney General enforcement actions and judicial foreclosure, and direct state agencies to adopt implementing rules. The bill would also affect contracts and property agreements that conflict with the new restrictions by deeming them invalid.
The bill appears to have received broadly favorable treatment in both chambers, with unanimous or near-unanimous floor votes and only limited opposition in one House committee vote. The voting record suggests lawmakers generally viewed the measure as a national-security and infrastructure-protection bill rather than a controversial policy change. The absence of recorded committee discussion limits insight into detailed arguments, but the final votes indicate strong overall support.
Likely areas of debate include whether the bill’s restrictions on foreign principals are too expansive, especially the 10-mile exclusion zone around military bases, the treatment of agricultural land ownership, and the invalidation of existing leases and contracts. The whistleblower bounty, Attorney General enforcement authority, and software-ban provisions may also raise concerns about implementation, due process, and economic effects on landowners, businesses, and public agencies. The 8-2 House committee vote on the amended version suggests some members had reservations even though the bill ultimately passed overwhelmingly.