President Donald Trump says he personally ordered the Department of Justice to sue Alaska in an attempt to prevent the state from certifying its U.S. Senate election results unless Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan wins. The lawsuit centers on concerns that voters could be confused by two candidates with nearly identical names on the ballot.
āIām the one that said do it,ā Trump told reporters Friday, acknowledging his role in initiating the legal action.
The Justice Department filed the lawsuit on Friday, seeking a court order that would prevent Alaska from certifying the election results if Sullivan loses. Government attorneys argue that votes intended for the incumbent could mistakenly go to another candidate with the same name, potentially changing the outcome of the race.
The case raises significant questions about federal authority over state-run elections, particularly just days before voters head to the polls.
Two Candidates With Nearly Identical Names
The Alaska Senate race features Republican incumbent Dan S. Sullivan, Democratic nominee and former congresswoman Mary Peltola, and Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., a retired teacher from Petersburg, Alaska.
The Justice Department argues that having two candidates with nearly identical names on the ballot could confuse voters and lead some supporters of the incumbent to vote for the wrong candidate.
According to the federal lawsuit, the confusion could affect the final outcome and benefit Peltola, who has been running a competitive campaign against Sullivan.
The lawsuit asks the court to prevent certification if the incumbent loses, arguing that he would have won if votes cast for Daniel J. Sullivan had instead gone to the sitting senator and Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system had been applied accordingly.
Alaska uses a ranked-choice voting system in which voters rank candidates according to their preferences. The system allows votes to be redistributed through subsequent rounds of counting when no candidate meets the required threshold.
Recent polling has suggested a close contest between Sullivan and Peltola, making the race potentially significant for control of the U.S. Senate.
Courts Previously Allowed the Candidate to Remain on the Ballot
The dispute over Daniel J. Sullivan’s candidacy began months ago.
In June, Alaska election officials removed him from the primary ballot, arguing that his candidacy was intended to confuse or mislead voters.
However, an Anchorage Superior Court judge overturned the decision, ruling that the claim was not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The ruling was subsequently upheld on appeal, and the state did not pursue an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The candidate was therefore allowed to remain in the race.
In the primary election, Peltola finished first with 49.5% of the vote, followed by incumbent Dan S. Sullivan with 41.4% and Daniel J. Sullivan with 2.5%.
The Justice Department is now seeking federal intervention despite the earlier state court proceedings.
Legal Experts Question Federal Intervention
The lawsuit has drawn criticism from election law experts, who question whether the federal government has the legal authority to intervene in Alaska’s certification process under these circumstances.
David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, described the lawsuit as an unprecedented federal intervention.
He argued that election certification is governed by state law and questioned the Justice Department’s authority to dictate when or how Alaska certifies its Senate election results.
Derek Muller, an election law professor at Notre Dame Law School, also sharply criticized the government’s legal arguments.
The controversy follows comments by Attorney General Todd Blanche, who recently declined to rule out circumstances in which the Justice Department might intervene to prevent states from certifying election results.
Blanche, a former criminal defense attorney for Trump, has also publicly rejected the traditional notion of a strict separation between the Justice Department and the White House.
A Broader Fight Over Election Authority
The lawsuit comes amid growing tensions over the federal government’s role in administering elections ahead of the November midterms, when control of Congress will be at stake.
The Trump administration argues that the legal action is intended to protect election integrity and prevent voter confusion. Critics, however, warn that conditioning certification on the victory of a particular candidate raises serious concerns about political interference in the electoral process.
The federal court’s decision could have implications beyond Alaska, potentially influencing future disputes over the balance of authority between the federal government and states in conducting and certifying elections.
