Federal Judge Rejects DOJ Lawsuit on Alaska Senate Election Delay

A federal judge in Alaska has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) that sought to delay the certification of the Alaska Senate election over concerns of potential voter confusion. The case centered on the presence of two candidates with the name Dan Sullivan on the ballot, which the DOJ argued could mislead voters if the incumbent Republican senator, Dan S. Sullivan, were to lose.

The decision came on Sunday, just two days prior to Election Day, and shortly after the U.S. Attorney for Alaska announced ongoing criminal and civil investigations regarding the candidacy of the non-incumbent Dan J. Sullivan. The lawsuit was challenged by state election officials, the campaign of Democratic nominee Mary Peltola, and outside advocacy groups who all urged U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason in Anchorage to dismiss the case.

Despite the ruling against the DOJ, the department swiftly announced plans to appeal the decision to the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. The election between Peltola and incumbent Senator Sullivan is closely contested and conducted under Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system. The outcome of this race is critical, as it will influence the narrow party majority in the U.S. Senate.

Neither the second Dan Sullivan nor another candidate on the ballot, Gerald Heikes, is considered a viable contender to win, but their presence can affect the final result by influencing voters' ranked choices. Voters who select these candidates first may impact who receives their secondary preferences, potentially swinging the election toward either Peltola or Senator Sullivan.

Allegations have circulated that the Peltola campaign had a role in encouraging the retired teacher Dan J. Sullivan to enter the race to confuse voters. These claims have been denied by Peltola’s team. Following the dismissal of the lawsuit, Peltola’s campaign issued a statement asserting that neither “a sham investigation nor a baseless lawsuit from a weaponized Department of Justice” would interfere with Alaskans’ right to choose their senator on November 3rd.

Judge Gleason’s 20-page opinion did not address whether the second Sullivan was deliberately recruited to confuse voters. Instead, she focused on the DOJ’s lack of legal standing to seek a delay in election certification. The DOJ had requested a court-ordered investigation into voter intent and confusion stemming from the presence of two candidates with similar names, but the judge found that the government failed to demonstrate how such relief could be achieved without violating voter secrecy.

Gleason highlighted the challenges posed by early voting, noting that ballots were already mixed and could not be linked back to individual voters. She stressed that the DOJ failed to propose a feasible method to separate and examine ballots cast for Daniel J. Sullivan while maintaining the confidentiality of votes.

The judge also cited the Supreme Court’s Purcell principle, which discourages courts from changing election rules close to voting day. Although the DOJ claimed it was not seeking to alter Alaska’s election timing or procedures, Gleason pointed out that their requests effectively sought to control the election’s administration, a responsibility reserved for the state government.

Additionally, the court refused the DOJ’s request to amend the lawsuit further. The amended complaint had introduced a new legal claim under the Supremacy Clause and included information from a New York Times article alleging the recruitment of the second Sullivan. The judge found no authority to permit federal law enforcement to segregate ballots for investigation purposes.

The DOJ’s spokesperson responded by stating the dismissal was on procedural grounds and reaffirmed the department’s position that Daniel J. Sullivan entered the race as a “frivolous candidate” intended to confuse voters. The DOJ reiterated its intention to appeal, emphasizing the importance of a fair election.

President Donald Trump publicly acknowledged that he directed the lawsuit, accusing Democrats of orchestrating the entry of the second Sullivan to mislead voters. The New York Times recently reported that aides from Peltola’s campaign and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee were involved in efforts to convince the retired teacher to run. Both Peltola’s campaign and the DSCC have denied these allegations.

Devan Barber, Executive Director of the DSCC, praised the ruling as a defense of democracy and criticized the Trump administration for trying to undermine elections. Barber expressed confidence that Alaska voters would choose Mary Peltola.

Senator Sullivan, speaking before the ruling, said he would accept the election results but accused Peltola’s campaign and the DSCC of cheating, claiming voters were being misled. Alaska election officials have taken steps to minimize confusion by clearly differentiating the candidates on the ballot. The incumbent appears as "Dan S. Sullivan" with labels identifying him as the incumbent and a registered Republican, while the other Sullivan is listed as "Daniel J. Sullivan" without additional designations.

As the election nears, this legal battle highlights the complexities and challenges of ensuring voter clarity and election integrity in a close race decided by ranked-choice voting. The ongoing appeal will determine if the DOJ’s concerns about voter confusion will affect the certification process or the final outcome in Alaska’s pivotal Senate contest.