Alabama Supreme Court lets Democrats' meeting proceed

Brian Lyman | Montgomery Advertiser

Show Caption Hide Caption Attorneys discuss hearing on State Democratic Executive Committee Attorneys discuss their sides following a hearing as to whether the State Democratic Executive Committee can meet and hold elections.

The Alabama Supreme Court Friday evening allowed a meeting of the Alabama Democratic Party's Democratic Executive Committee (SDEC) to take place on Saturday, hours after a Montgomery judge blocked it.

The justices did not give a specific reason for the decision, which allows members of an faction opposed to Alabama Democratic Party chair Nancy Worley to organize new diversity caucuses and hold leadership elections under a set of bylaws approved by the group on Oct. 5.

SDEC members are set to begin their meeting at 8 a.m. on Saturday. Ragsdale argued in court on Thursday that granting the injunction would violate his clients' First Amendment rights to assembly. However, Montgomery Circuit Judge Greg Griffin ruled on Friday that letting the meeting go forward — with Worley refusing to recognize the Oct. 5 meeting and operating under a different set of bylaws — would cause "chaos and confusion."

"Among other things, there will be confusion and controversy of which bylaws govern the November 2 meeting (assuming it is a valid meeting)," Griffin wrote. "And if the November 2 meeting takes place and a new chair of the SDEC is purportedly elected, it will not be even clear who is entitled to preside over the November 16 meeting, nor what set of bylaws will govern that meeting.

Ragsdale said before the Supreme Court's ruling that Griffin's ruling violated his clients right to assembly.

"It is so contrary to the law and the constitution that I’m shocked Judge Griffin would enter such an order," he said.

Worley said in a statement Friday evening — before the Supreme Court order — that she was "pleased" with Griffin's ruling, but said the justices made a "bad decision, but they are all Republicans."

"Why would they want the Democratic Party to function in an orderly way," she wrote.

With qualifying deadlines for primaries on Nov. 8, the state party will have to resolve its internal dispute, which threatens the state's presence at next year's Democratic National Convention. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) in February ordered the state party to hold new elections and revise bylaws to diversify the membership of the SDEC, the governing body of the Alabama Democratic Party.

The two factions ratified two different sets of bylaws in successive Saturday meetings early in October. The anti-Worley faction has ratified bylaws approved by the DNC and moved to hold new elections. But Worley says she will not recognize their actions and ratified a second set of bylaws at an Oct. 12 meeting.

Worley claims to have cancelled the Nov. 2 meeting at the Oct. 12 meeting, though it is not clear that she did so. She set her own leadership election for Nov. 16.

The DNC says the state party must carry out the February orders to get its delegate selection plan approved. If the plan is not approved, the DNC could refuse to seat state delegates at the 2020 Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee. That would effectively negate the ballots cast in next March's Democratic presidential primary in the state.

Since the DNC entered its orders in February, the state and national party have clashed over their implementation. Worley claims the national party has sent contradictory or confusing instructions, and repeatedly accused the DNC of trying to mute the voices of African Americans in the state party.

The DNC, in turn, says Worley has been unresponsive to requests and missed critical deadlines. It has repeatedly warned that not following their directives could prevent Alabama delegates from being seated at next year's Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee.

"The DNC has worked with Chair Worley and Vice Chair Kelly (and their counsel) to try to remedy this situation for more than a year," DNC Chair Thomas Perez wrote in an affidavit filed on Thursday. "They have been given ample opportunity to make their case before the DNC. They have consistently failed to comply with the directives of the DNC."

A group of SDEC members, including House Minority Leader Anthony Daniels, D-Huntsville and Rep. Christopher England, D-Tuscaloosa, drafted a new set of bylaws to comply with DNC orders, which the DNC approved in September. The national party set an Oct. 5 deadline to ratify the new bylaws; in response, Worley set a party meeting for Oct. 12.

The anti-Worley faction — which has the backing of DNC officials and U.S. Sen. Doug Jones, D-Ala. — then got a majority of the SDEC to set an Oct. 5 meeting, which ratified the new bylaws and scheduled new leadership elections for Nov. 2. Worley refused to recognize the meeting, and Joe Reed, the vice-chair of minority affairs for the party and a longtime power within it, urged members to boycott it.

Worley proceeded with an Oct. 12 meeting, where the SDEC ratified bylaws not approved by the DNC and set a Nov. 16 election date.

More: Alabama Democratic Party leaders sue to stop Saturday meeting

Worley sued to stop the meeting on Wednesday, arguing that it was unlawful and invalid under party bylaws. Worley and her allies have argued an Oct. 5 was less well-attended than one she called on Oct. 12, and that the party's bylaws prevented the SDEC membership from calling a meeting after she had scheduled one, a provision that does not appear in Democratic Party bylaws.

More: Montgomery judge hears arguments in Alabama Democratic Party feud

In court on Thursday, Segall argued allowing the Saturday meeting to proceed could cause chaos, and a split in the state Democratic Party.

The anti-Worley faction says their meetings are legal under national and state party bylaws and have the support of the DNC. They accuse Worley of trying to prevent an election because, they argue, she fears she cannot win it.

Griffin indicated during the court hearing on Thursday that he would file his decision in time to give either side a chance to appeal it in a timely manner. According to Alacourt, Griffin filed his order at 5:00:02 PM on Friday. The appeal notice was given eight minutes later.

"I was very surprised that the court would enter an order of such extraordinary magnitude after promising the opportunity seek appellate review to wait until 5 o'clock on Friday, less than 18 hours before a meeting would occur," Ragsdale said.

Contact Montgomery Advertiser reporter Brian Lyman at 334-240-0185 or blyman@gannett.com.