ST. CROIX — Former Senator Stephen “Smokey” Frett appeared in Superior Court Friday seeking to advance his challenge to the disqualification of his 2026 gubernatorial ticket, but the court declined to hear the merits after finding no evidence that Supervisor of Elections Caroline Fawkes had been properly served.
Frett, representing himself in the civil action, appeared before Judge Venetia Velázquez in the Superior Court’s St. Croix District. Fawkes was not present. Though the matter had been scheduled for a hearing, Velázquez said she could not enter an order without evidence that the opposing party had received notice, and the docket contained none.
When Velázquez asked what proof of service he had, Frett said he had documentation showing that St. Thomas/St. John Deputy Supervisor of Elections Kevermay Douglas had been served.
“We did this three times, your honor,” Frett said.
On August 7, Frett filed a “Return of Service” showing Douglas was served June 25. Frett added a handwritten note identifying Douglas as the deputy supervisor for the Elections System in the St. Thomas/St. John District.
“Please your honor, time is not on my side,” Frett wrote. “If you can please hear the case as early as you can. These people was served from Jun 25.”
Velázquez explained that serving Douglas does not establish that Fawkes — the actual defendant — was served. She also asked whether Frett had notified the Office of the Attorney General or the Office of the Governor, since he is suing Fawkes in her official capacity. He acknowledged he had not, and Velázquez noted she had raised the requirement with him “no fewer than two or three occasions.”
“This is a due process issue,” she said.
Frett then asked how he could properly serve Fawkes, saying he believed the process server understood what was required. Velázquez declined to advise him, explaining that the court cannot provide legal advice to a litigant.
“Where do we go from here?” Frett asked.
Velázquez said the court is prepared to hear the matter once Frett provides proof of service. When Frett asked whether he could serve notice on the Office of the Attorney General in St. Thomas, Velázquez again declined to provide legal advice. She told him only that the docket contained no evidence Fawkes had been served and that the case could proceed once she received notice.
“I can hear the matter on Monday if you show proof that you gave notice,” she said.
Frett also asked to appear remotely at future hearings. Velázquez said she had previously authorized remote appearances, provided Frett has reliable internet and privacy and submits any evidence in advance.
“I’m requesting it be done remotely now,” Frett said.
After asking whether Frett could access reliable internet, Velazquez agreed to let him appear from the St. Thomas courthouse by videoconference and said she would notify him which courtroom to use. She again emphasized that he must first provide notice to Fawkes.
Frett had one final request.
“Is there any way I can get a taxi to the airport?” he asked.
Velázquez directed him to the clerk’s office.
“Someone will assist you,” she said.
Frett declined to comment after the hearing, saying he wanted to wait until the case was over.
Frett, a former St. Thomas/St. John senator, was elected in 1996 to the 22nd Legislature. After serving one term, he subsequently ran for the Senate in every election from 1998 through 2020. He made his first gubernatorial bid in 2022, with Gregory R. Miller Jr. as his running mate.
The underlying challenge:
Frett filed the civil action June 25, asking the court to review Fawkes’ decision disqualifying his ticket after the Elections System found his running mate, Derek Bermudez, ineligible because he was not a registered voter in the Virgin Islands. Frett argues he was never given a meaningful chance to cure the defect or substitute another running mate, and that the disqualification was arbitrary and violated his right to due process. The Elections System has maintained there was no way to cure the problem, since Bermudez is not a registered VI voter at all.
The case was initially filed in the Superior Court’s St. Thomas/St. John District but was transferred to the St. Croix District after four judges recused themselves.
Judge Pedro Williams recused himself because of his prior private-practice representation of Frett. Judge Sigrid Tejo recused herself because she had prosecuted a case involving Frett while serving as an assistant attorney general. Judge Renée Marie André recused herself because a member of the Board of Elections is a family member. Judge Carol Thomas-Jacobs recused herself because, in her former roles as an assistant attorney general and chief of the Civil Division, she had represented Fawkes in several lawsuits.
The case was transferred to the St. Croix District and assigned to Velázquez.
Velázquez had also previously addressed Frett’s request for assistance in litigating the case. On June 25, Frett asked permission to use Tiniqua Knowles as a “consultant” in preparing and presenting his case. Velázquez denied the request July 9, citing the court’s prohibition against unauthorized practice of law.
In that order, the court also warned Frett that no proceedings or action would occur until there was evidence that the summons and complaint had been served in the manner required by law to bring the defendant within the court’s jurisdiction.
That same service issue was the focus of Friday’s hearing.
Other election-cycle litigation:
Frett’s case is not the only election-related lawsuit involving Fawkes during the 2026 election cycle.
Independent aspirant Jed JohnHope filed a separate federal lawsuit against Fawkes and Board of Elections Chair Raymond Williams after he was disqualified from the race for delegate to Congress for failing to submit the required number of nomination signatures.
JohnHope is also seeking permission to file a second amended complaint after filing an amended complaint on June 29. His motion states that the proposed amendment would add recently discovered facts and withdraw a separate claim concerning the federal requirement that the delegate to Congress be elected by a separate ballot. He indicated that he wants to withdraw that claim because Mary Moorhead has filed another case in Superior Court seeking to enforce the separate-ballot requirement, and he wants to avoid potential delays while still seeking to be placed on the ballot for the general election on November 3.
READ MORE: Mary Moorhead asks Superior Court to require separate ballot for federal delegate to Congress race
JohnHope alleges in a suit filed on June 22 by attorney Terri Griffiths that election officials violated his constitutional rights to procedural due process and equal protection by failing to provide him with a Notice of Defect and a three-day opportunity to cure his nomination papers, while providing those procedures to other candidates.
READ MORE: Jed JohnHope alleges constitutional violations in federal lawsuit against election officials
Fawkes and Williams have asked the federal court to dismiss JohnHope’s lawsuit. In an opposition filed Wednesday, JohnHope argued that the defendants improperly treated the requirement as a matter of the quantity of signatures rather than whether the signatures were from “qualified” electors. He also alleges that he was not given notice of a hearing or an opportunity to respond before the Board of Elections upheld his disqualification.
