> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.theamericanquorum.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Judge Dismisses DOJ Bid to Delay Alaska Senate Certification
- URL: https://www.theamericanquorum.com/judge-dismisses-doj-bid-delay-alaska-senate-certification/
- Published: 2026-11-01T19:29:56.000Z
- Updated: 2026-11-01T19:29:56.000Z
- Description: A federal judge dismissed DOJ’s bid to delay certification of Alaska’s closely watched Senate race, finding no workable way to investigate ballots without violating voter secrecy. A separate criminal inquiry remains active.
- Author: News Desk
- Tags: Breaking News, Alaska

A federal judge on Sunday dismissed the Justice Department’s attempt to block certification of Alaska’s closely watched U.S. Senate election if Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan loses, ruling two days before Election Day that the government lacked standing and had proposed no workable way to investigate voter intent without violating ballot secrecy.

U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason’s 20-page [court order](https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/Order-granting-dismissal.pdf?ref=theamericanquorum.com) ended the civil case without leave to amend. She found that ballots already cast have been separated from identifying information and commingled, while special treatment of ballots ranking another candidate named Daniel J. Sullivan would alter election procedures at the last moment. The dismissal was entered without prejudice because the court concluded it lacked jurisdiction.

The ruling removes the immediate federal-court threat to Alaska’s certification process in a race that may help determine control of the Senate. It does not resolve a separate criminal investigation into whether the second Sullivan was recruited to confuse voters, and it does not decide whether campaign operatives acted improperly. [Associated Press](https://apnews.com/article/b35acffc8b55ef58679d9b8395760f98?ref=theamericanquorum.com) reported that grand-jury subpoenas have been issued and the FBI has contacted donors; no candidate or campaign official has been charged.

## Why the court rejected the requested remedy

The Justice Department’s central problem was not simply timing. Gleason held that the government could not show that the court had power to redress the injury it alleged. Alaska preserves ballot secrecy by separating a voter’s identity from the ballot before counting. That means officials cannot determine whether someone who ranked Daniel J. Sullivan did so deliberately, mistakenly or as part of a broader ranked-choice strategy.

The government asserted that Alaska could segregate ballots but did not explain how to preserve secrecy, the order said. Gleason wrote that ballots already cast cannot now be identified by voter. She concluded that separating Election Day ballots based on how they were marked would require an intervention the court “cannot or should” order.

The judge also invoked the Supreme Court’s Purcell principle, which cautions federal courts against changing election rules close to voting. Letting law-enforcement officers investigate the intent of people who voted for one candidate could discourage participation and intrude on state election administration, she wrote. Alaska law already requires federal-election ballots to be preserved for 22 months.

## How two Sullivans produced a federal case

The original [DOJ complaint](https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/1-2026-10-22-Complaint.pdf?ref=theamericanquorum.com), filed Oct. 22, alleged that retired teacher Daniel J. Sullivan entered the race to mislead supporters of Sen. Dan S. Sullivan and benefit Democratic nominee Mary Peltola. It asked the court to prevent certification if the incumbent lost and if reallocating every vote cast for the other Sullivan would have changed the ranked-choice result.

Those claims remain allegations. Peltola has denied involvement in recruiting the second Sullivan, while Daniel J. Sullivan has denied coordinating with her campaign. Alaska election officials initially tried to remove him from the ballot after questioning whether his candidacy was made in good faith, but a state trial court reversed that decision and the Alaska Supreme Court affirmed it in June.

The federal order recited the certified primary result: Peltola received 49.54%, the incumbent received 41.40%, Daniel J. Sullivan received 2.47% and Republican Gerald Heikes received 1.05%. Those numbers show why the second Sullivan’s presence is politically significant, but do not establish voter confusion or determine the general-election outcome.

## Alaska’s ballot distinguishes the candidates

Alaska’s official [candidate list](https://www.elections.alaska.gov/election-candidates/?ref=theamericanquorum.com) identifies Dan S. Sullivan as the Republican incumbent and lists Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. separately. The state’s [sample ballots](https://www.elections.alaska.gov/sample-ballots/ballot/eo5lb/?ref=theamericanquorum.com) explain that voters may rank candidates in order of preference and do not have to rank every candidate. A second choice is counted only if the voter’s first choice is eliminated.

That system matters to both the government’s theory and the court’s ruling. A ballot ranking Daniel J. Sullivan first and the incumbent second could ultimately transfer to the senator if the first candidate is eliminated. But a ballot cannot reveal why those rankings were chosen. Gleason concluded that the court could not authorize an investigation that assumes a voter’s marked choice was a mistake and then seeks to reconstruct a different intention.

Alaska’s Republican-led government took the same position despite supporting an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the candidacy. In a filing summarized by [Alaska Public](https://alaskapublic.org/news/politics/elections/2026-10-27/state-of-alaska-says-doj-lawsuit-over-senate-race-has-no-legal-basis?ref=theamericanquorum.com), state attorneys argued that delaying certification would interfere with election administration and that there was no lawful method to identify supposedly mistaken ballots.

## The criminal inquiry continues separately

The civil dismissal does not stop federal investigators from examining whether anyone broke criminal law in arranging or financing Daniel J. Sullivan’s candidacy. [CBS News](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-doj-lawsuit-alaska-senate-race-dan-sullivan/?ref=theamericanquorum.com) reported that subpoenas target several Democratic officials believed to be connected to the recruitment effort. The existence of subpoenas establishes an investigation, not wrongdoing, and no charges had been announced by Sunday afternoon.

Gleason’s ruling neither validated nor rejected the recruitment allegations. It held that the United States had not shown how stopping certification or investigating marked ballots could legally correct the injury it claimed.

## What happens before Election Day

Alaska can proceed under its existing ranked-choice rules unless an appellate court intervenes. The Justice Department had not announced an appeal by Sunday afternoon, and initial reports said the department had not responded to requests for comment. Any emergency appeal would face the same compressed timetable and the district court’s findings on standing, ballot secrecy and last-minute changes.

Voters will choose among four Senate candidates on Tuesday, Nov. 3\. The civil ruling means election officials may count and certify those ballots through Alaska’s ordinary process; it does not predict who will win or end the political dispute over the second Sullivan’s candidacy. The next concrete developments are whether DOJ appeals, whether the criminal inquiry produces charges, and whether the final margin makes the 2.47% primary showing by Daniel J. Sullivan relevant to the general-election outcome.