So are you saying that because judges have used Roman Law in the past (which makes little sense outside of Louisiana) the legislative branch does not have the authority to state that their laws must be interpreted according to our cultural understanding and legal tradition from which the laws they wrote originated? They cannot state that other laws, specifically international law (which IS based on Roman Law) and Sharia Law cannot be applied, since they fall outside our Anglo-Saxon legal tradition (or for any reason they so choose)?
That's like saying a legislature cannot state, “A judge cannot use laws outside this jurisdiction because the judge prefers the results of the application of another jurisdiction's laws.” Good grief, it's stating the obvious that judges have simply ignored.
If the Oklahoma Legislature cannot direct its judges on how to understand the laws it creates on behalf of the People of Oklahoma, why have a legislature at all? A judge can just deconstruct the clear language of a statute to say the opposite of what it says to everyone else just trying to abide by the law.
The legislature is here to MAKE laws (or, better yet, to delete some). If it be the case that this is a poorly worded law, we are ruled by the whim of appointed judges.
If this law was worded in a way that only targeted laws that contradict our laws then it should easily pass. Just use an example such as rape under sharia is completely different then ours.