How to get the best coverage from the Oklahoma newspapers

By Josh ZumbrunnerOctober 16, 2018 12:05:21The most important newspaper in Oklahoma has a special relationship with the state that has kept it on the national radar screen for years.

In the early 1980s, it published a front-page article about a serial killer who killed several women in the state’s capital and was eventually captured.

That led to a national search for a killer, but no one was ever caught.

But that changed with the publication of a new Oklahoma City newspaper in 1990, one that was also a cover story in the New York Times and the Washington Post.

The paper, the Oklahoman, published a series of articles that highlighted the Okies’ unique reputation for being the first state to legalize same-sex marriage and adoption in 1990.

And while the stories were generally good, they didn’t win the Pulitzer prize for investigative reporting.

The newspaper was nominated for the Pulitzer in 1988, but lost to the New Yorker.

In 1992, the Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down the state constitution’s ban on same-gender marriage and adopted a law allowing same-year marriages.

The justices were also the first in the nation to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation in hiring and employment.

They did it with the same-day service that now makes up the majority of Oklahomans’ daily newspaper, and they did it while also allowing same sex couples to adopt.

In 1998, the state Supreme Court ruled that the state had a “moral duty” to honor its religious beliefs.

That prompted the state Legislature to pass a law that banned discrimination based upon sexual orientation and gender identity.

It also allowed people to use restrooms, locker rooms, and showers that corresponded to their gender identity without discrimination.

In a case that lasted more than a decade, the Supreme Court found that the law did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

In 2014, the court struck down a state law that limited marriage to a man and a woman, and ordered the state to follow a new law that made it illegal to discriminate in employment, housing, public accommodations, or public education based on gender identity and sexual orientation.

That law was signed by Republican Gov.

Mary Fallin, who also signed the same year that the new law allowed same- and opposite-sex couples to marry.

But the courts struck down that law in June, and Fallin appealed.

The appeals court affirmed the lower court’s decision in August, and in December the Supreme, in a 5-4 decision, declared the Oklahoma state constitution unconstitutional.

In its opinion, the high court said that because the Oklahoma Constitution does not define “gender identity,” the state was violating the U.S. Constitution.

The high court ruled that since the Oklahoma constitution does not specifically define “sexual orientation,” the court did not have to consider the constitutionality of the Oklahoma legislature’s ban.

The Supreme Court said that in Oklahoma, a law “requiring an individual to use a particular facility to use facilities corresponding to one’s sexual orientation is unconstitutional under the Equal Protects Clause of Article I, Section 8 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Oklahoma does not recognize any such requirement in the United States Constitution.”

The court also said that Oklahoma’s laws were not unconstitutional because the state did not believe that they violated the Equal Privileges Clause of that constitutional provision, which protects people against government action that “substantially burdens” a person’s “sincerely held religious beliefs.”

The Oklahoms’ Supreme Court did not offer a detailed reasoning for its decision, but it did say that Oklahoma did not “imply that any requirement of accommodation in its laws is invalid.”

The high Court said the decision does not require a change in Oklahoma’s constitution, and that it “is not necessary to alter the constitution to reflect this decision.”

The court did find that Oklahoma could not continue to enforce the same anti-discrimination law that was upheld in June.

“The Court finds that Oklahoma has not established a substantial likelihood of success on the merits,” the high Court wrote.

“Because Oklahoma is not required to enforce its anti-discriminatory legislation by way of a constitutional amendment, the Court finds Oklahoma’s statute does not violate any of the Equal Coverage Clause of its constitution.

It does not infringe on Oklahoma’s prerogative to make laws for its own good, and it does not substantially burden the exercise of religion.”

The decision was a blow to advocates of gay rights who say the high courts have been too quick to overturn laws that have protected gay rights in states with similar protections.

Oklahoma’s anti-same-sex-marriage law is now the subject of an ongoing lawsuit that could ultimately force the state and other states to change their laws.

But the Oklahoma case is the latest in a series that have seen a slew of states and counties, including Texas and Alabama, overturn laws and policies that have helped protect gay and lesbian people from discrimination.

And this week, a federal