An Arkansas judge has sharply criticized Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders for postponing a special election, arguing that her decision undermines citizens’ right to representation. The election in question is intended to fill the vacancy left by the late state Senator Gary Stubblefield of District 26, who passed away last month.

In an eight-page ruling, Sixth Judicial Circuit Judge Patricia James addressed the controversy, highlighting that the governor’s choice to set the election for June 9, 2026, contradicts state law. This date exceeds the 150-day limit set for filling such vacancies and would result in the district lacking representation during the state’s 2026 fiscal session from April to May.

“Holding the special election on June 9, 2026, would leave the citizens of Senate District 26 without a senator throughout the entire 2026 Fiscal Session of the General Assembly,” Judge James asserted in her ruling. “Such a delay would unconstitutionally impair the rights of the district’s residents.”

The judge further cautioned that allowing Governor Sanders to proceed as planned could have “far-reaching ramifications.” She emphasized the potential negative impact on the citizens of District 26, underscoring the importance of timely representation. Judge James’s ruling serves as a significant judicial rebuke of the governor’s actions, stressing the necessity for adherence to state laws and the protection of democratic processes.

James went on, warning of “far-reaching ramifications” if Sanders was enabled to act according to her desire. Of the citizens of the state’s District 26, the judge wrote:

They would not be able to fully and effectively participate, nor would they be able to have an effective voice in the election of members of their state legislature. To allow the special election to take place after the conclusion of a legislative session would indeed result in an infringement of a constitutional right based on the fundamental democratic principle of ‘no taxation without representation.’ There would be far-reaching ramifications if the Governor were allowed to deny duly elected representation for the citizens of the State of Arkansas and any action resulting in the denial of adequate representation for any Arkansas citizen conscience of this court.

At the conclusion of this year’s fiscal session, the Arkansas Senate outlined its plans to “consider spending bills” during next year’s convention.

There are 256 days between June 9, 2026, and Sept. 26, 2025, the day Sanders set that June date for the special election. An Arkansas governor can set a special election outside of the 150 days if scheduling one within that time frame would be “impracticable or unduly burdensome,” state law says.

However, James wrote that “the analysis does not stop there” — the General Assembly has stated “the special election shall be held as soon as practicable after the one-hundred-fiftieth day following the occurrence of the vacancy.”

Sanders has maintained that she has the “discretion” to set dates for special elections and that the court does not have the authority to overrule her. On this point, James was especially clear: “Although this court agrees that the Governor has the sole ability to set dates for a special election, that authority is not absolute.”

“The court has the ability and authority to determine whether the application of such statute is applied constitutionally,” the judge went on. “The Supreme Court of Arkansas has specifically held that ‘a state official who acts unlawfully does so without the authority of…the state in its sovereign capacity.’ Especially when such authority by the Governor runs the risk of circumventing a constitutionally protected right.”

The lawsuit was filed by Colt Shelby, a farmer in Franklin County who is registered to vote in Senate District 26, according to the Arkansas Times. He asked the court “to find the Governor failed to follow the law concerning the calling of special elections to fill vacancies.”

James ultimately sided with Shelby, ruling that the date for the special election “shall be set as soon as practicable after the one-hundred-fiftieth day following the occurrence of the vacancy in accordance.”

Sanders and Arkansas Attorney General Ryan Hale promptly appealed her ruling to the Arkansas Supreme Court. Shelby’s attorney subsequently cross-appealed, seeking “expedited proceedings” because “time is of the essence” and the citizens “suffer direct harm during each day of disenfranchisement.” He wants a decision “as soon as possible” but no later than Nov. 23.