Justice Department pushes to delay certification of Alaska's Senate race as judge sets Thursday deadline

A federal judge in Anchorage has pushed the Trump administration to the brink of a deadline in an unusual lawsuit that seeks to delay certification of Alaska's United States Senate election, five days before voters decide whether Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan keeps his seat. U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason ordered the Justice Department to respond by 3 p.m. Thursday, October 29, to a motion from the State of Alaska asking her to throw the case out entirely, with the state's reply due by noon Friday and a ruling possible that same night.

The Justice Department sued Alaska on October 22, asking the court to block certification of any result in which Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola but would have won had every vote cast for a second candidate on the ballot, Daniel J. Sullivan, instead gone to the senator. The suit names the state, its elections director and its ballot-counting boards as defendants and rests on a single federal statute, the National Voter Registration Act's instruction that states "protect the integrity of the electoral process." The matter is proceeding as United States v. State of Alaska, No. 3:26-cv-00376-SLG, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska. The race itself remains an active, closely tracked contest on the Federal Election Commission's own election page for Alaska's Senate seat, which lists both Sullivan and Peltola as federally registered candidates.

Two candidates, one name

The numbers behind the dispute are small by national standards but could decide control of a Senate seat. In Alaska's open, top-four August primary, Sullivan drew more than 68,000 votes and Peltola led the field, while Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired teacher from Petersburg running with no party affiliation, received 4,107 votes, roughly 2 percent of the total, according to results reported by the Associated Press. Alaska's November contest will be decided under ranked-choice voting, a process that can take weeks to produce a final tally and that Republicans argue makes confusion between the two Sullivans more consequential.

State election officials have already weighed in on the second Sullivan's intentions. In a June 15 letter cited in the Justice Department's own complaint, Alaska Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher found that his candidacy appeared "for the purpose of confusing or misleading voters and compromising the fairness of the ballot." Republicans used that finding to try to remove him from the ballot over the summer, but the Alaska Supreme Court rejected the effort, ruling that the state could not bar a qualified candidate from running, and ordered him listed. The November ballot now identifies Sullivan as the Republican incumbent and lists the challenger as Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. with no party designation, according to Alaska Public Media.

President Trump has said he personally directed the suit. "I'm the one that said do it," he told reporters as he landed for a campaign rally, after writing on Truth Social that his administration was "looking at powerful legal options to remove the fraudulent Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. from the Ballot," the Associated Press reported. Attorney General Todd Blanche has offered a narrower defense of the filing, saying in a television interview that "it is not DOJ's intention to, and it's never our intention to, improperly interfere with elections," and that the department is acting only to protect the integrity of Alaska's vote.

A Republican senator breaks ranks

The lawsuit has drawn unusually open criticism from Alaska's other senator, Republican Lisa Murkowski, who has sparred with the administration before. Writing on social media, she said the state had already handled any potential confusion by distinguishing the two men clearly on the ballot and that federal intervention was unnecessary.

"The Department of Justice should have never filed this lawsuit," Murkowski wrote, adding that "Alaskans don't need any help voting for their preferred candidates."

Sullivan's own campaign has kept its distance from the suit without disowning it. A spokesman, Nate Adams, said the campaign would "let the DOJ complaint run its course" and that "Alaskans can tell the difference between a Democrat sideshow and Senator Sullivan's strong record of delivering for Alaska." The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has been far more blunt, with spokesman Devan Barber calling the suit a "sham" filed because Trump "knows that Dan Sullivan is going to lose the election."

Election law scholars have been skeptical that the case has a legal foundation. Notre Dame law professor Derek Muller told the Associated Press that "the statute simply doesn't let the Department of Justice enjoin certification," and University of Kentucky election law professor Joshua Douglas, quoted by Alaska Public Media, called the filing "a press release disguised as a lawsuit." Alaska's own motion to dismiss argues that delaying certification only if one particular candidate loses would itself interfere with state election administration, and that any court inquiry into which voters meant to support which Sullivan would violate the secrecy of the ballot.

Who has a stake

Beyond the two Sullivans and Peltola, the case has drawn in national party infrastructure on both sides. Court filings show the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and a group called Alaskans for Mary intervened in the case on October 23, and Judge Gleason granted their request to join as defendants on October 28, alongside the League of Women Voters of Alaska and Common Cause, both of which had separately sought to intervene. The Justice Department initially opposed allowing those groups into the case but withdrew that opposition on Wednesday, clearing the way for the judge's order.

For Alaska's roughly 738,000 residents, the immediate practical effect has been uncertainty over when, or whether, their Senate results will be certified on the usual timetable if the race is close. For the two national parties, the race is one of a small number of competitive Senate contests this cycle, and the outcome carries weight for which party organizes the chamber in January.

What happens next

The Justice Department's brief defending its suit was due Thursday afternoon, Alaska's reply is due by noon Friday, and Judge Gleason has indicated she could rule on the motion to dismiss as soon as Friday night, according to Alaska Public Media. The state has separately asked the court to resolve the dismissal question no later than Monday, the day before polls close. Whatever Gleason decides is likely to be appealed, and Alaska's ranked-choice tabulation process means a definitive winner in the Sullivan-Peltola race may not be known for weeks after Tuesday's vote regardless of how the certification dispute is resolved.