Alaska’s ranked-choice U.S. Senate race on 3 November has two candidates named Sullivan: incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan and Daniel J. Sullivan, who is also listed as a Republican. The U.S. Department of Justice has sued the State of Alaska, Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher and the state’s election and ballot-review boards in federal court in Anchorage. DOJ filed an amended complaint on 29 October (Dkt. 43). On 30 October it moved for expedited discovery and a preliminary injunction (Dkt. 66, 70).

What DOJ is asking for

  • Now: an order directing the state to “preserve and segregate all ballots ranking Daniel J. Sullivan for the purposes of investigating whether such ranking was the product of voter confusion, should such an investigation become necessary.”
  • In the amended complaint: an injunction against “certifying any result that may be impacted by voter confusion … pending an investigation to determine whether votes cast for Daniel J. Sullivan were meant to be cast for Senator Sullivan”.
  • Expedited discovery about how Daniel J. Sullivan came to run, aimed at the intervenors Alaskans for Mary (Democratic nominee Mary Peltola’s campaign) and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

DOJ’s legal theory relies on the National Voter Registration Act’s purpose to “protect the integrity of the electoral process” (52 U.S.C. § 20501(b)(3)), on obstacle preemption under the Supremacy Clause, and on the federal duty to retain election records (52 U.S.C. § 20701). DOJ calls segregating the ballots “a negligible further burden”.

What DOJ relies on

  • A 15 June Division of Elections letter. It found that Daniel J. Sullivan’s declaration of candidacy was filed “with the purpose to confuse or mislead”. It notes he asked to be listed as “Dan Sullivan” and as “Dan S. Sullivan” (S is the senator’s middle initial, not his). It also notes he switched to the Republican Party just before filing, and that he worked with a consultant who backs Democratic candidates.
  • A state court overturned his exclusion, and the Alaska Supreme Court summarily affirmed on 29 June (No. S-19935), with an opinion to follow. He is therefore on the ballot.
  • New York Times reporting, which DOJ quotes at length. It describes a “ballot composition project” involving the Peltola campaign’s lawyers and DSCC aides to recruit spoiler candidates. These are DOJ’s allegations, built on press reports. No court has found them to be true.

The other side

The state defendants asked the court to dismiss the amended complaint “immediately, with prejudice” (Dkt. 55). “No legal authority supports the United States’ untenable reading of the NVRA,” they wrote, arguing that the reading would turn a voter-registration law into “a limitless grant of authority for federal interference in state-run elections”. They also say the complaint lacks “a cognizable legal theory”. Alaskans for Mary and the DSCC (Dkt. 57) filed their own motion to dismiss, as did the League of Women Voters of Alaska, Common Cause and two voters (Dkt. 60). All of the defendants oppose fast-tracking DOJ’s injunction motion (Dkt. 72–74).

On 30 October Judge Sharon L. Gleason expedited the motions to dismiss. She ordered DOJ to respond by 1 p.m. that day and allowed replies until noon on Saturday 31 October (Dkt. 64). As of this morning we found no ruling on dismissal or on the injunction.

Citizen impact: Alaskans vote on Tuesday as usual, and the court has ordered nothing yet. If DOJ wins, ballots ranking Daniel J. Sullivan would be kept apart, and certification could be held up while an investigation runs. If the motions to dismiss succeed, the case ends. In ranked-choice counting, the ballots of an eliminated candidate move to each voter’s next choice, so it could matter where the second Sullivan’s ballots go.