Judge Tosses DOJ Alaska Senate Lawsuit Over ‘Fake’ Dan Sullivan

A federal judge on Sunday dismissed the Justice Department’s lawsuit over Alaska’s U.S. Senate race, rejecting the Trump administration’s attempt to block certification of the result if Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan loses to a Democratic challenger — and a second candidate who happens to share his name.

U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason ruled that the relief the government sought was “infeasible” because many Alaskans have already voted, and the ballots cast so far have been combined in a way that makes it impossible to identify individual voters. The Justice Department said Sunday it plans to appeal.

The decision, issued two days before Tuesday’s midterm elections, removes — for now — a federal legal cloud over one of the Senate races that could help decide control of the chamber. Republicans currently hold a 53-47 Senate majority, and Democrats are targeting Alaska as one of a handful of states where they could gain ground.

What the Justice Department asked for

The lawsuit, filed on October 22, asked the court to order Alaska to segregate and preserve ballots cast for Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired teacher from Petersburg who is on the ballot as an unaffiliated candidate, and to block the state from certifying the Senate result if incumbent Sen. Dan S. Sullivan lost and votes for the other Sullivan could have changed the outcome.

The department argued that the second Sullivan’s candidacy was a frivolous effort meant to confuse voters, and it sought an investigation into whether ballots marked for Daniel J. Sullivan were actually intended for the senator. The case was amended after a New York Times report alleged that people connected to Democratic challenger Mary Peltola’s campaign had helped recruit a namesake candidate.

Alaska election officials, represented by the Alaska Department of Law, called the case meritless and asked Gleason to throw it out. State courts, including the Alaska Supreme Court, had already rejected Republican-backed efforts to keep Daniel J. Sullivan off the August open primary ballot, where he appeared as Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. with no party affiliation. He won about 2.5 percent of the primary vote — enough to finish in the top four and qualify for the November 3 ranked-choice general election, in which the senator is listed as Dan S. Sullivan, Republican incumbent.

Why the judge threw the case out

Gleason wrote that the government offered no workable plan for carrying out what it asked for. In her words, the United States provided no workable plan for how it proposed to segregate ballots cast for Daniel J. Sullivan on Election Day and then conduct a court-ordered, unspecified “investigation” of those ballots in a manner that would preserve voter secrecy.

With early voting already underway and ballots commingled, she wrote, the requested remedy could not be implemented without undermining the secret ballot. Some reporting on the ruling also noted that Gleason found the Justice Department lacked proper legal standing to bring the case.

The Justice Department responded that the court had dismissed the case on procedural grounds and had not disputed its argument that Daniel J. Sullivan entered the race as a frivolous candidate meant to confuse voters. “DOJ plans to file a notice of appeal. Alaskan voters deserve a fair” election, the department’s rapid response account said Sunday.

The incumbent says he will accept the result

Sen. Sullivan himself moved on Sunday to separate himself from the legal fight over certification, vowing to accept the election outcome. That pledge came as the race between Sullivan and Peltola, a former U.S. representative, heads into its final days under Alaska’s ranked-choice system, in which voters rank candidates and the lowest vote-getters are eliminated in rounds until one candidate passes 50 percent.

President Donald Trump, meanwhile, weighed in again on social media after the ruling, saying the other Dan Sullivan had “disappeared.” Trump had previously called Daniel J. Sullivan a “FAKE” candidate and demanded that both he and Peltola be removed from the ballot, claims the Peltola campaign has denied. Peltola has said she had no knowledge of any recruitment effort and has described the controversy as a distraction.

The dispute has already drawn congressional attention. House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer launched an investigation into the allegations last week, seeking testimony from Peltola’s former campaign manager and from a Democratic operative named in the Times report. Separately, the Justice Department is conducting a criminal investigation into the alleged recruitment effort; no one in the race has been charged with a crime, according to reporting on the case.

What happens next in Alaska

For Tuesday’s vote, nothing changes on the ballot. Alaskans will choose among Sullivan, Peltola, Daniel J. Sullivan and a fourth candidate under ranked-choice voting, and the state will certify the result under its normal process unless an appeals court intervenes — a prospect that now looks difficult with Election Day two days away and early ballots already cast.

In Alaska, the practical question for voters is simpler than the legal argument that dominated the weekend: two men named Dan Sullivan are on the ballot, listed differently, and only one of them is the incumbent senator seeking re-election.

Frequently asked questions

Who are the two Dan Sullivans in the Alaska Senate race?
Incumbent Republican Sen. Dan S. Sullivan is seeking re-election. Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., a retired teacher from Petersburg, is also on the ballot as an unaffiliated candidate. Democratic challenger Mary Peltola is the third major candidate in the race.

Why did the Justice Department sue over the Alaska Senate race?
The department argued that Daniel J. Sullivan’s candidacy was meant to confuse voters and sought to segregate his ballots and block certification if the incumbent lost and the namesake’s votes could have changed the result.

Why did the judge dismiss the lawsuit?
Judge Sharon Gleason ruled the requested relief was “infeasible” because many voters had already cast ballots that have since been commingled, and the government offered no workable plan to investigate those ballots while preserving voter secrecy.

Will the Justice Department appeal?
Yes — the department said Sunday it plans to file a notice of appeal, though it has not said when an appeals court could act.

Does the ruling change Tuesday’s ballot in Alaska?
No. The ballot is unchanged, and Alaska will vote under its top-four primary and ranked-choice general election system on November 3.

Sources: Al Jazeera; Associated Press via the New Indian Express; USA Today.