Judge dismisses DOJ suit over Alaska ballot confusion, but Justice Department vows appeal

Key points

• Judge Gleason dismissed the case on procedural grounds, stating the DOJ offered no workable way to determine if votes for Daniel J. Sullivan were intended for Sen. Dan Sullivan without compromising ballot secrecy.
• The DOJ plans to appeal the ruling, with spokesperson Kiersten Pels asserting that Alaskan voters deserve a fair election and that the court did not dispute the argument that the second candidate was a frivolous decoy.
• The lawsuit, filed less than two weeks before Election Day, alleged that the presence of Daniel J. Sullivan threatened to mislead voters and potentially affect the outcome of the closely watched race.
• Incumbent Sen. Dan Sullivan stated in an interview that he would accept the election results, while also accusing Democrat Mary Peltola of lying about her knowledge of the recruitment efforts.
• The DOJ cited a New York Times report in an amended complaint, alleging that Peltola’s campaign coordinated to recruit the second candidate, a claim Peltola has denied.

Background

This dispute follows a series of legal challenges in late October, including a DOJ suit filed on Oct. 24 and an amended complaint on Oct. 30 that issued 40 subpoenas. Earlier, Alaska state officials sought dismissal of the federal suit, arguing the government lacked constitutional authority to intervene in state election certification. The Alaska Supreme Court had previously upheld the inclusion of Daniel J. Sullivan on the primary ballot, where he received 2.5% of the vote.

How outlets are covering it

Axios and The Guardian report that the DOJ will appeal the dismissal, with the Justice Department maintaining that the second candidate was a frivolous entry intended to confuse voters. The Guardian highlights that voting rights experts called the federal intervention unprecedented, while Axios notes that the judge warned against last-minute changes to election procedures. The Anchorage Daily News offers a contrasting perspective through an opinion piece by Seth Kantner, who criticizes The New York Times for focusing on the Sullivan case while ignoring other ballot issues, such as the inclusion of a candidate serving a federal prison sentence. Kantner argues that Alaskans are aware of the name confusion and questions why similar tactics by Republicans are not treated with the same severity.

Why it matters

The dismissal ensures that the Alaska Senate race will proceed without federal interference in the certification process, a race that could determine control of the U.S. Senate. The outcome highlights tensions between federal election integrity claims and state sovereignty in election administration, as well as the impact of last-minute legal challenges on voter confidence and ballot secrecy.

What to watch

The DOJ plans to appeal the ruling, which could lead to further legal battles before or after Election Day. Alaska will proceed with ranked-choice voting, allowing voters to rank both Sullivans. The final certification of the election results will depend on the outcome of the vote and any subsequent legal challenges.