ANCHORAGE — The U.S. Department of Justice filed a federal lawsuit Thursday seeking to prevent Alaska from certifying the results of the state's U.S. Senate race if a second candidate with the same name as incumbent Sen. Dan S. Sullivan remains on the ballot — an action President Donald Trump said Friday he ordered.
Federal challenge centers on similar candidate names
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Alaska, argues that the presence of a second candidate identified as Daniel J. Sullivan could confuse voters and improperly affect the outcome of the contest between Sullivan and Democrat Mary Peltola, the state’s former congresswoman. The filing describes Daniel J. Sullivan’s candidacy as frivolous and asserts it was intended to siphon votes away from the incumbent.
President Trump told reporters as he arrived at a campaign rally in Florida that he had instructed officials to bring the legal challenge.
“I’m the one that said do it,”
The case centers on a narrow but politically sensitive issue — whether Alaska can proceed to certify the results of the Nov. 3 election if the ballot still includes Daniel J. Sullivan. The lawsuit includes sample ballots and campaign logos as evidence and points to how the state’s practice of listing ballot entries alphabetically could result in similar names appearing in close proximity without party modifiers for the second Sullivan.
Local reactions and political stakes
The filing comes 11 days before voters go to the polls in a race widely expected to be closely contested. Republicans fear the second Sullivan could draw enough votes from the incumbent to tip the contest to Peltola. Democrats have rejected that theory and called the challenge an attempt to interfere with the election.
At a forum in Anchorage Friday night, Peltola criticized the lawsuit as improper interference.
“This is just flagrant, flagrant corruption in my opinion,”
She told reporters the suit was “another diversion from the issue that Alaskans want to talk about, which is affordability,” and accused her Republican opponent of leveraging Washington connections to influence state election procedures.
Legal approach and novelty
Legal experts described the type of lawsuit as unusual. The Justice Department’s complaint invokes federal interest in protecting election integrity and leans on a reading of federal law that critics say is novel in this context. Officials included a sample ballot as part of the evidence, showing how names and party designations appear to voters.
The lawsuit seeks an injunction preventing state officials from certifying the race if Daniel J. Sullivan remains listed on the ballot. It does not ask the court to change the ballot directly, but to tie certification to the presence or absence of that candidate.
What’s on the ballot
| Candidate | Designation on sample ballot |
|---|---|
| Dan S. Sullivan | registered Republican; incumbent |
| Daniel J. Sullivan | no modifiers listed |
| Mary Peltola | former congresswoman (Democrat) |
Potential consequences and timeline
The suit arrives late in the pre-election calendar — months after the final ballot list was set and less than two weeks before Election Day. If the court issues emergency relief, it could delay or complicate the state’s certification timeline and potentially set up an extended legal dispute between federal and state authorities over election administration.
Observers noted that federal intervention in state certification decisions is rare and that previous election litigation normally focuses on voting procedures, counting disputes or access rather than directly conditioning certification on the presence of a particular ballot name.
Key points for Alaska voters
- The lawsuit does not remove any candidate from the ballot; it seeks to prevent certification if the second Sullivan remains listed.
- The legal filing relies in part on a sample ballot and how candidates are presented to voters.
- Court action, if granted, could delay certification and possibly prompt further litigation between the state and the Department of Justice.
The immediate practical effect for voters is limited: ballots already printed and absentee voting underway will proceed unless the court orders otherwise. But the larger legal fight could extend past election day and shape debates about federal authority in state-run elections.
Legal filings are public record; the case is now set to move through federal court in Alaska where judges will consider the government's request in the days ahead.
— Erik Lindgren, State Correspondent
