DOJ Preemptively Sues to Block Alaska Senate Certification Over Name Confusion

Key points

• The DOJ filed suit Thursday, seeking to block certification if Dan Sullivan loses and if votes for Daniel J. Sullivan would have changed the outcome under ranked-choice rules.
• Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward Jr. argued that the presence of the second Sullivan creates a substantial likelihood of voter confusion, violating federal election integrity laws.
• Legal experts, including Derek Muller of Notre Dame Law School, called the legal theory 'strange and unusual,' noting that federal law does not typically allow the DOJ to challenge state ballot certification.
• Alaska election officials had already taken steps to reduce confusion, listing Dan S. Sullivan as 'incumbent' and 'registered Republican,' while Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. is listed without party affiliation.
• The case has been assigned to Judge Sharon L. Gleason, an Obama appointee, and the administration has not requested an immediate emergency injunction.

Background

This lawsuit follows a contentious primary where Democrat Mary Peltola received 49.5% of the vote, while incumbent Dan Sullivan received 41.4%. Daniel J. Sullivan, a former Alaska Independence Party member who registered as a Republican earlier this year, finished third with 2.5% of the vote. In June, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that Daniel J. Sullivan should remain on the ballot after state election officials initially removed him for lack of 'good faith.' The current suit is part of a broader pattern of the Trump administration challenging state election processes, including a recent lawsuit in California seeking to block the counting of 20,000 ballots.

How outlets are covering it

The DOJ and Trump administration frame the lawsuit as a necessary step to protect election integrity, with Trump calling the second Sullivan a 'cheat' and 'spoiler candidate.' NBC News and CNN highlight the legal dubiousness of the move, with experts noting that the DOJ's role in elections is limited by law and that the ranked-choice system mitigates confusion. The Guardian focuses on broader midterm election issues, including state ballot initiatives and Republican internal conflicts, but does not directly address the Alaska lawsuit. BBC provides a neutral overview, noting that neither candidate has commented on the lawsuit and that the race is among the most closely watched in the midterms.

Why it matters

The outcome of the Alaska Senate race could determine the balance of power in the U.S. Senate, with Democrats needing to net four seats to win control. The lawsuit raises significant questions about the role of the federal government in state election certification and the limits of the DOJ's authority in challenging election results. It also highlights the potential for post-election legal battles in close races, particularly in states using ranked-choice voting.

What to watch

The case will proceed in federal court, with the administration potentially seeking to delay certification if Dan Sullivan loses. Alaska election officials are expected to begin the ranked-choice tabulation process on November 18, more than two weeks after Election Day. Legal experts will closely watch whether the court grants any emergency relief or upholds the state's right to certify the results.