Alaska Senate Lawsuit: Trump Says He Ordered the DOJ Suit

The Alaska Senate lawsuit just turned one of the strangest races of the midterms into a national fight over who gets to certify an election. Late on Thursday, the Justice Department asked a federal court to stop Alaska from certifying the result if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. On Friday, President Donald Trump told reporters he was the one who ordered it, according to the Alaska Beacon.

What the Alaska Senate lawsuit actually says

The Alaska Senate lawsuit was filed in federal court in Alaska against the state's Division of Elections. It targets a quirk on the ballot: a second candidate named Dan Sullivan. He is Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. of Petersburg, a fishing enthusiast and former teacher, and he is running as an undeclared candidate against the incumbent, Dan S. Sullivan.

The Justice Department calls the second Sullivan's candidacy "frivolous" and says it was meant to confuse voters and help Peltola. It argues that Alaska should not certify results until an investigation measures how much confusion there was. The claim leans on the preamble of the National Voter Registration Act, which talks about protecting the integrity of the electoral process, as the Alaska Beacon reported.

The filing arrived eleven days before Election Day on November third, and months after the final ballot was set. Polls show Peltola with a small lead, according to the Alaska Beacon.

Trump says he gave the order

Trump did not hide his role. "I'm the one that said, 'do it,'" he told reporters as he landed in Florida for a campaign rally, according to the Associated Press. The AP noted that many people fear the case could kick off a long fight between the federal government and the states over certifying results in a year when the president's party is struggling.

The suit was signed by Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, the department's third-ranking official. Sullivan's campaign did not say whether the senator backs the move. Spokesman Nate Adams said only that the campaign would "let the DOJ complaint run its course," and a person tied to the campaign said the senator had not asked for the lawsuit.

Why legal experts are rolling their eyes

Almost every legal voice quoted so far thinks the Alaska Senate lawsuit is a long shot. Derek Muller, an election law professor at Notre Dame, called it one of the worst legal arguments he has ever seen. He also pointed out that one paragraph is missing the verb that would ask the court to do anything.

Walter Olson of the Cato Institute went further, calling the case "abusive in intent and nearly frivolous in argument," according to Politico. Politico also noted that the Alaska Supreme Court already turned down a similar challenge to the second Sullivan's candidacy in June, which would normally close the book on a state-level election question.

The Constitution gives states authority over how they run their elections. That makes a federal request to freeze certification an unusual stretch, even for an administration that has been pushing hard on election procedures in the final weeks of the campaign.

Ranked choice voting undercuts the confusion claim

Alaska uses ranked choice voting in general elections. Any voter who truly mixed up the two Sullivans could simply rank both of them, in either order. If no one gets a majority of first choices, the last-place finisher is eliminated and those ballots move to second choices, and that repeats until two candidates remain.

The ballot also lists the two men differently. The incumbent appears as "Sullivan, Dan S. (Registered Republican) Incumbent," while the other appears as "Sullivan, Daniel J. Jr." with no party listed. The primary results point the same way: Peltola took forty-nine point five percent, Dan S. Sullivan took forty-one point four percent, and Dan J. Sullivan took two point five percent. An Anchorage Press review found many of his votes came from left-leaning districts, which suggests Democratic-leaning voters chose him on purpose rather than Republicans stumbling into a mistake.

What happens next

The case landed with Judge Sharon Gleason, an Obama appointee and the most senior of the two judges on the Alaska federal bench. Muller expects the court to wait until after the vote, since the theory only matters if Sullivan loses by fewer votes than the second Sullivan received. Proving which of those voters were confused, he said, would be an impossible evidentiary question.

Peltola's campaign called the move a threat to overturn an election and hinted it may step into the case. The state's Department of Law said the complaint is under review and that election officials are focused on running the election. For now, the practical takeaway for Alaskans is simple: early voting is open, and every ballot is still being counted the normal way. Keep an eye on our politics coverage and world news for what happens once the votes are in.