ST. CROIX — Independent congressional aspirant Jed JohnHope has terminated his attorney and will represent himself in his federal lawsuit against Supervisor of Elections Caroline Fawkes and Board of Elections Chair Raymond Williams, according to filings in the case.
JohnHope’s attorney, Terri Griffiths, filed a stipulated motion Tuesday asking the District Court of the Virgin Islands to allow her to withdraw and for JohnHope to proceed pro se. The motion states that JohnHope directed Griffiths to prepare it and asked that all future court submissions be sent to him by email.
The change comes as JohnHope seeks to have his name placed on the November 3 ballot for delegate to Congress. In a September 17 motion for partial summary judgment, he argues that election officials violated his constitutional rights by denying him a three-day opportunity to correct deficiencies in his nomination papers. He also asked the court for expedited consideration because of the election date.
In a separate filing Tuesday, JohnHope submitted supplemental authority in support of his pending motion, arguing that the Board of Elections defendants have not disputed several key facts.
According to the filing, the Board of Elections defendants do not deny that JohnHope was not provided procedural due process, that he was qualified under federal law to run as a candidate for delegate to Congress, or that Fawkes did not provide him with a Notice of Defect and three-day opportunity to cure the deficiency in his nomination petition. JohnHope also states that the defendants do not deny that he was not provided with notice or an opportunity to challenge Fawkes’ decision.
The supplemental authority filed by JohnHope is a September 24 temporary restraining order issued by U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly in a case brought by CNN, MS NOW and POLITICO and several of their reporters against President Donald Trump and White House officials. Kelly found the plaintiffs likely to succeed on a Fifth Amendment procedural due process claim after their White House press credentials were revoked without prior notice or an opportunity to be heard. JohnHope argues the ruling is persuasive authority, while acknowledging it is not binding.
The filing also alleges that the Board of Elections has distributed ballots without his name, which he contends violates federal law.
JohnHope was disqualified from the delegate race after election officials determined he did not meet the required signature threshold. The Elections System previously said he submitted 28 signatures from the St. Thomas/St. John District and three from St. Croix, well short of the 100 required from each district. Fawkes cited an opinion from the Office of the Attorney General concluding that the deficiency could not be cured after the filing deadline because the signatures had not been obtained.
JohnHope alleges that on May 19, the deadline for submitting nomination petitions, Elections System employees told him he would have three days to obtain additional qualified signatures if his papers were found defective. He claims Fawkes instead announced his disqualification May 26 and notified him by email May 27, without the notice and three-day cure period he says is required under 18 V.I.C. § 411(c). That provision, he argues, requires officials to notify a candidate of defective nomination papers and allow three days to submit a valid replacement before disqualification.
He says he submitted additional signatures May 29, but an Elections System employee told him they could not be accepted because she had been directed to reject them.
JohnHope also says he appealed to the Board of Elections but was given no hearing or opportunity to present his case before the board affirmed the disqualification. He says Williams sent him correspondence June 18 upholding Fawkes’ decision.
JohnHope argues that the procedures used by Fawkes and the board violated his rights to equal protection and procedural due process under the 14th Amendment. He also cites 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 18 V.I.C. § 411(c). He maintains there are no genuine disputes of material fact and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
He says at least five other aspirants failed to submit 100 qualified signatures but received Notices of Defect and a chance to obtain more signatures, and that his papers should have been handled the same way. He also disputes the defendants’ characterization of the signature requirement, arguing the issue was whether signatures came from qualified electors rather than simply how many were submitted.
The defendants, represented by Assistant Attorney General Suzette Richards, have disputed JohnHope’s interpretation of the law and asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit. They argue he failed to satisfy the statutory signature requirement and that the three-day cure provision did not apply in the circumstances of his filing.
Another Virgin Islands election case recently addressed whether a candidate’s eligibility deficiency could be cured after disqualification.
In a September 14 ruling, Superior Court Judge Venetia Velázquez denied former Senator Stephen “Smokey” Frett’s request to overturn the disqualification of his 2026 gubernatorial ticket. She found Frett was not entitled to substitute a different running mate after his original running mate, Derek Bermudez, was determined by Fawkes to be ineligible. The court also ruled Frett was not denied due process when the Board of Elections decided his appeal without an evidentiary hearing, because the appeal raised only the legal question of whether the disqualification could be cured through substitution rather than challenging Bermudez’s voter eligibility.
