Federal judge denies Alabama town's first Black mayor denied special election (2024)

A man who claims to be a tiny Alabama town’s first Black and rightful mayor, only for the town’s white leaders to conduct a special election to usurp his power, was denied his request for a November special election on Friday.

Patrick Braxton, a resident of Newbern, a town in Hale County with a population of just 133 people, filed a lawsuit in federal court in Selma alleging his white predecessor, Haywood Stokes III, and the white city councilors who scheduled a special election, violated the Constitution and several laws, including the Voting Rights Act.

In late March, Braxton and the Black members of the city council elected with him, filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, requesting a judge order a special election to coincide with the November presidential election.

While U.S. District Court Judge Kristi K. DuBose ruled Friday that Braxton and the Black members of the city council elected with Braxton “are likely to succeed on the merits of their constitutional claim,” she said the plaintiffs did not prove they would suffer “irreparable harm” if she didn’t grant a November special election.

Braxton’s case is set for a bench trial in September in Selma.

In her decision, DuBose noted that the plaintiffs filed their initial lawsuit in 2022, two years after the white mayor and council held a meeting -- and their only one since then -- at Newbern Town Hall.

“And yet, Plaintiffs initiated this litigation in Dallas County Circuit Court in November 2022 and moved for a preliminary injunction in late March 2024. Accordingly, because Plaintiffs have fallen short of establishing irreparable harm between now and the September 2024 trial, Plaintiffs’ Motion is DENIED,” DuBose ruled.

Haywood Stokes III, the Hale County town’s white mayor since 2008, who inherited the post from his father, Haywood Stokes, Jr., does not dispute Braxton being the only resident to qualify for mayor.

But Stokes is claiming that there was nothing untoward about the special election the all-white council held that led to the council declaring themselves the winners and appointing Stokes interim mayor.

In the suit, Braxton alleged the special election was illegal, claiming neither he nor the town’s Black residents were notified about it.

“Defendants, in contravention of the Alabama Code, failed to provide notice to voters in Newbern of this special election, thereby preventing them from participating in the election,” the amended lawsuit stated. “The denial of a ‘legally-required election obviously erodes the democratic process’ in a manner that is incompatible with due process.”

The suit, which also claims alleges the defendants prevented Braxton and the all-Black council from discharging their duties, including changing the locks on the town hall and preventing them from accessing city documents and bank accounts.

Meanwhile, Newbern hasn’t held an election in decades, with the town’s white residents treated elected offices as “hand me down” positions, according to the lawsuit.

“The repeated failure of Newbern officials to hold or give notice for a municipal election — for decades — is unfortunately emblematic of ongoing attacks against Black voters,” said Morenike Fajana, special counsel for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, which began representing the plaintiffs last week in addition to the group’s previous attorneys. “It is imperative that courts step in to ensure that everyone’s right to vote is protected.”

The lawsuit also accuses the defendants of a section of the Voting Rights Act, noting that “Alabama has a long, well-established history of racially discriminatory voting restrictions and societal discrimination against Black Alabamians.”

“Defendants’ conduct resulted in the discrimination of Black voters by preventing them from participating, as a candidate or voter, in municipal elections,” the lawsuit continued. “Defendants will continue to violate Plaintiffs’ rights under the Voting Rights Act absent relief from this Court. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law other than the judicial relief sought in this case. The infringement of Plaintiffs’ rights by Defendants is ongoing and likely to continue into the future.”