Did A Supreme Court Nominee Violate The Constitution?

  Patrick Wyrick, A native of Atoka, Oklahoma, has been working and living in Oklahoma City. He is, in fact; the Solicitor General for the state of Oklahoma. 
  But the Oklahoma Constitution mandates that the 9 justices should collectively represent all areas of the state.

  In fact, when Steven Taylor, perhaps the most "strict-constructionist" of the justices, retired; the founding text mandates that a qualified attorney or judge from that same 2nd court district should replace Taylor.
Article VII - Section 2 says;
Each Justice, at the time of his election or appointment, shall have attained the age of thirty years, shall
  • have been a qualified elector in the district for at least one year immediately prior to the date of filing or appointment, and
  • shall have been a licensed practicing attorney or judge of a court of record, or both, in Oklahoma for five years preceding his election or appointment and
  • shall continue to be a duly licensed attorney while in office to be eligible to hold the office.

  The Oklahoma Democrat Party contends that Wyrick was not a qualified elector (qualified to be a voter) in Oklahoma's 2nd Court District.
  If Wyrick is not a registered voter, then it seems pathetic that he should be a leader of our civic matters. The high court needs character, more than debate skills. 
  If Wyrick is a registered District 2 voter, or has a valid drivers license, utility bill, library card, or other such residency evidence, then he can clear this matter up promptly.
​   He has not done that...
  Yes, he won a US Supreme Court case... But is he a geniunely honorable boy scout? Does he possess the honor worthy of the high court? 
​  Will he construct a convaluted narrative to cheat his way onto the high court?