Alaska’s Republican-run state government asked a federal judge on Saturday to dismiss a lawsuit filed at President Donald Trump’s direction that seeks to block certification of a possible Democratic win in the state’s pivotal Senate race, calling the case meritless and the relief it seeks impossible to grant.
State attorneys wrote that there was “no reason for this Court to entertain this meritless lawsuit any longer”, in a filing that landed just three days before Americans vote in the November 3 midterm elections. They asked US District Judge Sharon L. Gleason to dismiss the case with prejudice, which would bar the Justice Department from bringing it again.
Why the filing matters is that the defendants are Republicans asking a court to throw out a lawsuit brought by a Republican administration in support of a Republican incumbent. That split has made the case one of the most closely watched election fights of the final campaign weekend.
“Disturbing and impossible”
At the centre of the dispute is a second candidate with almost the same name as the incumbent. Republican Senator Dan S. Sullivan is seeking re-election against Democrat Mary Peltola, but the ballot also carries Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired schoolteacher from the remote fishing village of Petersburg. The Justice Department argues that Peltola’s campaign helped recruit the second Sullivan, creating confusion that could divert votes meant for the incumbent.
On Friday, the department added a request that the judge order election officials to separate all ballots showing votes for the second Sullivan until it can be determined whether voters were fooled into wasting their votes. Alaska’s filing called that idea “both disturbing and impossible”, arguing that there would be no way to carry it out without violating voter privacy.
“No matter how the ballots are physically stored, it will be easy to tell which ballots rank Daniel J.,” state attorneys wrote, according to NBC News. “If the United States means something different, as it seems to, its ballot segregation proposal is both disturbing and impossible.”
State officials also argued that the federal government has no proper basis to intervene in a race whose certification belongs to Alaska. The administration has pointed to a preamble in a 1990s voter registration law as giving it responsibility for the integrity of federal elections, but Alaska said that argument does not hold. “State officials carefully designed the ballot to minimize voter confusion,” the filing said, noting that the senator appears on the ballot as a Republican and the incumbent, while the other candidate appears simply as “Daniel J. Sullivan”.
A case that has already changed shape
The lawsuit, filed on October 22 against Alaska election officials, originally sought to block certification of the Senate result unless Sullivan was declared the winner. It has since changed shape: the Justice Department amended its complaint after a New York Times report said internal texts and posts appeared to show Peltola’s campaign was involved in recruiting the second Sullivan, and that Peltola knew about it.
That amendment forced Gleason to rule earlier dismissal motions moot, and new motions followed. Peltola’s campaign, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and two nonpartisan groups have also asked the judge to dismiss the case. Gleason set a Saturday deadline for arguments over whether she should dismiss the lawsuit without even a hearing, leaving open a ruling before election day.
Trump has said he personally ordered the suit, and he has demanded that Peltola be prosecuted following the Times report. On Saturday, Senator Sullivan told Fox News there was “no way Peltola doesn’t know about” the alleged effort to recruit his namesake, according to NBC News. Peltola has denied involvement in the challenger’s campaign, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has also denied involvement; the allegations have not become findings of criminal wrongdoing. The state’s filing argues that even the new claims about her campaign do not change the second Sullivan’s legal right to be on the ballot.
Alaska’s Republican governor, Mike Dunleavy, who announced a state investigation after the Times story, has condemned the second Sullivan’s placement on the ballot. But the Alaska Supreme Court ruled this summer that the second candidate fulfilled all legal requirements to stay on, and the state’s filing says that ruling still stands.
What happens next
Gleason is expected to rule soon on whether the lawsuit survives or is dismissed, and the Justice Department has asked for a decision by Monday, November 2, the day before the election. If she dismisses it with prejudice, as Alaska has asked, state officials would proceed with counting and certification without a federal court order hanging over the result. If she lets it proceed, the fight over segregating ballots could run into the counting process itself.
The Justice Department has also issued subpoenas and announced a criminal investigation in the case, a step election law experts have criticised as an unusual use of federal power in the middle of a campaign. Alaska’s filing put the state’s position bluntly: the court should “immediately dismiss this lawsuit with prejudice and allow state officials to conduct the general election, including ballot counting and certification, free from unwarranted federal interference.”
What is confirmed is that Alaska has asked for dismissal, that the judge is weighing the case before election day, and that the second Sullivan remains legally on the ballot. What is not confirmed is how Gleason will rule, or whether the Justice Department’s criminal inquiry will produce charges. Voters in Alaska will cast their ballots on Tuesday regardless, in a race that now carries a courtroom fight as well as a campaign.
