Oklahoma Senate Bill SB1784

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26
• Refer: 2/3/26

Caption

State government; creating the Oklahoma State Protection from Terrorist Organizations Act. Effective date.

Summary

SB1784 creates the “Oklahoma State Protection from Terrorist Organizations Act,” a new state policy framework aimed at preventing public resources from being used by organizations credibly associated with terrorism or material support for terrorism. The bill authorizes the Governor to designate an organization as a designated terrorist organization for state administrative purposes, but only on written recommendations from the Department of Public Safety, the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, and the Attorney General, and based on an evidentiary record. Designations must be filed with the Secretary of State and made publicly available, with sensitive investigative material kept in a protected annex. Once designated, an organization or its controlled entity would be barred from receiving or renewing state contracts or grants, and state agencies and state-funded entities would be required to use vendor or grantee certifications and audit procedures. The bill also prohibits designated organizations and controlled entities from acquiring or holding real property in Oklahoma, except for court-ordered liquidation or disposition. The Attorney General would be able to seek injunctive relief, void prohibited contracts or transfers, recover misspent funds, and pursue other equitable remedies, while suspected criminal conduct would be referred for prosecution under existing law.

Impact

The bill would add a new section to Title 74 of the Oklahoma Statutes and would also interact with existing terrorism definitions in Title 21. It would create a state-level designation process for terrorist organizations for administrative purposes, impose contracting and grant restrictions on state agencies and state-funded entities, and restrict real property ownership by designated organizations and controlled entities. It also gives the Attorney General new civil enforcement tools and establishes a reconsideration and judicial review process for affected entities, with removal petitions available after 24 months or sooner if circumstances materially change.

Sentiment

The bill’s stated purpose and structure suggest a strong security-focused and preventive approach, with explicit language emphasizing that the measure is intended to be religion-neutral and viewpoint-neutral and not to regulate protected speech or lawful association. No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the available materials. Based on the text alone, the bill appears designed to appeal to concerns about terrorism financing and public accountability while attempting to limit constitutional or civil-liberties objections through narrowing language and review procedures.

Contention

The main likely points of contention are the breadth of the Governor’s designation authority, the evidentiary standard for identifying a “designated terrorist organization,” and the potential for collateral effects on affiliated entities, property rights, and public contracting. Civil liberties or due process concerns may focus on whether the administrative designation process is sufficiently transparent and reviewable, while supporters would likely emphasize the bill’s safeguards, including reliance on law-enforcement recommendations, judicial review, and the exclusion of peaceful advocacy or charitable activity unless it constitutes material support for terrorism. The property restriction and contract/grant prohibitions are the most consequential enforcement provisions and would likely be the most debated.