⚔️ The Battle Within: Arizona Democratic Party's Leadership Crisis Exposes Deep Racial Tensions

Establishment figures unite against first Black party chair in unprecedented power struggle

Apr 23, 2025

😽 Keepin’ It Simple Summary for Younger Readers
👧🏾✊🏾👦🏾

The Democratic Party in Arizona is having a big argument between its leaders. 🗣️ Robert Branscomb, the first black man who was elected to lead the party in January, says powerful politicians like Senators Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego threatened him when he tried to make decisions about who to hire. ⚖️ These senators and other important Democrats like the Governor say they don't trust Branscomb anymore.

🤝 This fight is happening because the regular party members voted for Branscomb because they wanted change, but the powerful politicians preferred someone else. 🔄 This disagreement shows how sometimes organizations say they support diversity and fairness but have trouble actually sharing power with people from different backgrounds. 🌈✊

🗝️ Takeaways

🔍 Robert Branscomb, the first Black chair of the Arizona Democratic Party, has publicly accused Senators Kelly and Gallego of threatening him over staffing decisions, exposing deep racial and power tensions.
💥 Top Arizona Democrats, including the Governor, both Senators, Secretary of State, and Attorney General, have united against Branscomb, claiming he has "lost their trust."
🏛️ The conflict stems from Branscomb's January election victory over the establishment-backed incumbent, representing grassroots demand for change after Democratic losses in 2024.
🗣️ TUSD Board member Sadie Shaw has publicly backed Branscomb, connecting his treatment to broader patterns of racism and gatekeeping within the Democratic Party.
💰 Financial transparency concerns were part of the initial leadership change, with allegations of "self-dealing" by the former party treasurer, who was also voted out.
⚖️ The timing threatens Democrats' chances in crucial 2026 elections when several statewide offices, including the governorship, will be defended.
🌱 This conflict represents a larger struggle between grassroots movements demanding change and established power structures resistant to sharing control.

Give a gift subscription

Power, Race, and Resistance: The Battle for Democracy Within Arizona's Democratic Party

In the sun-scorched borderlands of Arizona, a political firestorm has erupted that reveals deep fractures within the Democratic Party—fractures that mirror broader struggles for power, representation, and accountability across the American political landscape.

Read Robert Branscom, the New Chair of AZ Democratic Party, in his Own Words now from Blog for Arizona for Politics from a Liberal Viewpoint

As we navigate the increasingly polarized terrain of the second Trump administration, what's happening in Arizona serves as both a warning and an inspiration for resistance movements nationwide.

The Letter That Shook Arizona Politics

On April 19th, Robert Branscomb, the first Black Chair of the Arizona Democratic Party (ADP), sent a bombshell letter to State Committee Members detailing a disturbing pattern of obstruction, intimidation, and racial tension he's faced since his election in January 2025. The letter quickly went viral, sparking heated debate and revealing the often hidden power dynamics that shape our political institutions.1

In his letter, Branscomb made serious allegations against some of Arizona's most powerful Democrats, including Senators Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego. He claimed they threatened and intimidated him when he exercised his authority to hire an Executive Director of his choosing. According to Branscomb, one senator texted that he would withdraw from party fundraising efforts, while the other demanded Branscomb reverse his hiring decision within 24 hours or "face consequences."2

¿Quién controla a quién? Who controls whom? This question lies at the heart of the controversy.

The swift reaction from Arizona's Democratic establishment was telling. Within hours, Senators Kelly and Gallego, Governor Katie Hobbs, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, and Attorney General Kris Mayes released a joint statement declaring that Branscomb "has lost our trust" and dismissing his claims as "bad faith."

The coordinated response further inflamed tensions and turned what might have been an internal party dispute into a public battle over who truly holds power in Arizona Democratic politics.

A History of Exclusion

To understand the significance of this conflict, we must recognize its historical context. Branscomb's election in January was historic—he is the first African American to chair the Arizona Democratic Party. His decisive victory (318-206) over former chair Yolanda Bejarano represented a clear mandate for change from the party's rank-and-file, who were frustrated with recent electoral defeats and a perceived disconnect from working-class and rural communities.

The irony cannot be ignored: a party that publicly champions diversity and inclusion appears to be struggling with these very principles in its internal operations. Keep in mind that this is the same state party that supported Kyrsten Sinema and Rodney Glassman for US Senate, two people who are no longer Democrats.

Sadie Shaw, a Tucson School Board member and City Council candidate, highlighted this contradiction in her powerful op-ed supporting Branscomb.

She wrote: "It's about the persistent problems embedded in Arizona's Democratic Party and the gatekeeping that punishes anyone who challenges the status quo—especially if they're Black, independent, principled or unapologetic about their vision."3

Shaw's words resonate because they touch on the lived experience of many who have tried to change systems from within, only to face resistance from established power structures. Her own background as a grassroots organizer and educator who has fought for arts education in schools and community preservation in Tucson's historically Black Sugar Hill neighborhood gives weight to her perspective on the challenges facing those who dare to challenge the status quo.

Race and Power in Democratic Politics

The racial dimensions of this conflict cannot be ignored. In his letter, Branscomb alleged that a top staffer for Senator Kelly claimed his election was the result of "Black folks coming after Latinos"—a statement that, if true, represents a troubling attempt to pit communities of color against each other.

This dynamic is not new to Arizona politics. Governor Hobbs herself has a complicated history regarding race. As Shaw noted in her op-ed, Hobbs "lost two-thirds of her campaign staff due to an emotionally abusive work environment, and a jury found her guilty of discrimination against a Black staffer."

For many of us in Indigenous and Chicano communities, these tensions feel painfully familiar. The Democratic Party has long relied on the support of Black, Indigenous, and Latino voters while often failing to address internal racial hierarchies or truly share power with these communities.

What we're witnessing in Arizona is the inevitable result of decades of tokenization without transformation.

The Transition of Power

The conflict began almost immediately after Branscomb's election. According to his letter, he arrived at party headquarters to find "an empty workspace" and faced obstruction from the outgoing leadership. He alleged that the previous administration "withheld banking information, stonewalled my efforts, and discouraged current staff from staying on, even offering to help them find other jobs."

This apparent sabotage of a smooth transition reflects a deeply troubling attitude toward democratic processes. When party insiders refuse to accept the results of internal elections, how can they credibly champion democratic values in the broader political arena?

Financial questions further complicate the situation. Branscomb's election came amid allegations of financial impropriety involving the former party treasurer, with claims of "self-dealing" through contracts worth over $120,000 since 2021. While the previous chair dismissed these allegations as "defamatory," both the chair and treasurer were voted out, and Branscomb has called for a full audit.

Implications for 2026 and Beyond

The timing of this internal strife could hardly be worse for Arizona Democrats. The party faces crucial elections in 2026, with Governor Hobbs, Secretary of State Fontes, and Attorney General Mayes all up for re-election in what promises to be challenging races, especially with Republicans energized by Trump's return to the White House.

Rather than focusing on voter registration, fundraising, and organizing, the party is now embroiled in a bitter public dispute that threatens to undermine its effectiveness. Some party insiders worry that if the conflict isn't resolved quickly, it could significantly impact Democrats' chances in these critical races.

Yet there's another perspective: perhaps this painful process is necessary for creating a more authentic and effective Democratic Party in Arizona.

The state's changing demographics and political landscape demand new approaches and new voices. Branscomb ran on a platform of reconnecting with working-class communities, improving communication with rural areas, and bringing more transparency to party operations—all changes that could potentially strengthen the party in the long run.

Lessons for Resistance in the Trump Era

As we navigate the second Trump administration, the Arizona Democratic Party's internal struggle offers important lessons for resistance movements across the country.

First, resistance must begin within our own institutions. We cannot effectively challenge authoritarianism, racism, and corporate capture in the broader political system if we tolerate these same patterns within progressive organizations.

Second, authentic leadership matters. When party leaders are selected primarily for their ability to raise money or maintain the status quo rather than their connection to communities or commitment to progressive values, the result is often a hollow politics that fails to inspire or mobilize voters.

Third, transparency and accountability are non-negotiable. Shaw's call for elected officials to remember their oath—"to support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the state of Arizona, and to defend us against all enemies, foreign and domestic"—reminds us that democracy requires constant vigilance, even (or especially) within democratic institutions.

A Path Forward

Despite the serious challenges revealed by this conflict, there are reasons for hope. The very fact that party members elected Branscomb despite opposition from establishment figures suggests a hunger for change and a willingness to challenge entrenched power. Similarly, Shaw's courageous public support for Branscomb indicates that there are elected officials willing to take principled stands even when it means confronting powerful interests.

The path forward for Arizona Democrats—and for progressive movements nationwide—lies not in papering over differences or enforcing false unity, but in having honest conversations about power, race, and accountability. Only by confronting these issues directly can we build movements and institutions capable of advancing true democracy and social justice.

As Shaw wrote in her powerful conclusion: "It's time to speak out, stand up, and lead with courage. Our country depends on it."

How You Can Get Involved

If you're inspired to action by these events, here are some ways to get involved:

Attend local Democratic Party meetings – Your voice matters in shaping the direction of the party at all levels, from precinct committees to state leadership.
Support candidates who prioritize transparency and accountability – Look beyond party labels to find leaders committed to democratic values in practice, not just in rhetoric.
Join or support grassroots organizations – Groups working on issues like voting rights, immigration justice, and environmental protection often provide more direct ways to advance progressive values than traditional party structures.
Speak up against intimidation and bullying – Whether in political organizations, workplaces, or community groups, challenge behaviors that silence dissent or marginalize certain voices.
Support independent media – Traditional news outlets often miss the deeper dynamics of political conflicts. Independent journalists and platforms provide crucial perspectives and information.

Speaking of independent media, your support for Three Sonorans helps us continue providing this type of critical analysis from the borderlands. As we navigate the turbulent politics of the Trump era, independent voices from frontline communities are more important than ever. Consider making a donation, sharing our articles, or subscribing to our newsletter to stay informed about developments in Arizona and beyond.

What do you think about the conflict within the Arizona Democratic Party? Is it a necessary reckoning or a destructive distraction? Leave a comment below sharing your thoughts on how political parties can better live up to their democratic ideals, and what lessons we can draw from this situation for resistance in the Trump era.