Federal Judge Dismisses Justice Department Lawsuit Over Alaska Senate Ballot Names

U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason dismissed a Justice Department lawsuit on 1 November 2026 that sought to delay certification of Alaska’s Senate election if Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan loses.

The suit, filed less than two weeks before election day, asked the court to investigate whether votes for a second candidate named Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired teacher, were intended for the senator. Alaska uses ranked-choice voting. The Democratic nominee is former Representative Mary Peltola. Polls in the final week showed a close race.

Gleason ruled that the United States failed to establish the redressability requirement for Article III standing. She wrote that the relief sought was infeasible because many ballots had already been cast and mixed in a way that prevents matching them to individual voters. “The United States provides no workable plan as to how it proposes to segregate ballots cast for Daniel J. Sullivan on Election Day and then conduct a court-ordered unspecified ‘investigation’ of those ballots in a manner that would preserve voter secrecy,” she stated.

The dismissal was without prejudice on jurisdictional grounds. Gleason denied leave to amend as futile. The Justice Department filed a notice of appeal the same day. A department spokesperson said the judge had not disputed the claim that the second Sullivan entered the race to confuse voters.

State election officials and Peltola’s campaign had asked for dismissal. They argued that any attempt to reallocate votes after the fact would violate ballot secrecy. Early voting was already underway when the suit was filed. The second Sullivan has done little campaigning; his presence on the ballot under the same surname and party affiliation created the basis for the government’s claim.

Alaska’s ranked-choice system allows voters to rank candidates. If no one reaches 50 percent in the first round, lower-ranked candidates are eliminated and their votes redistributed. The government’s theory was that some first-round votes for the teacher Sullivan might have been intended for the senator and should be reassigned if the result hinged on that margin.

Gleason’s order emphasized practical barriers. Once ballots are cast and co-mingled, there is no mechanism to identify which votes for “Daniel J. Sullivan” belong to which person without violating the secret ballot. The court found no workable remedy that could be applied after election day.

The ruling removes one procedural obstacle to normal certification. Alaska’s Division of Elections will count and tabulate results under existing rules. Any challenge to the outcome would have to proceed through the state’s ordinary contest procedures rather than a preemptive federal injunction.

The two Sullivans share a common name but different middle initials and backgrounds. The teacher has not mounted a visible campaign. His filing nonetheless triggered the federal action in the final days of a contest that could affect Senate control.

Peltola, a Democrat, previously held the state’s at-large House seat. Sullivan has served in the Senate since 2015. The race has drawn national attention and outside spending. The name-confusion claim added a legal dimension that the court has now rejected on standing grounds.

The Justice Department’s appeal will be heard after election day. In the meantime, Alaska voters cast ballots on 3 November under the existing candidate list. Certification will follow the state’s normal timeline unless a new court order intervenes.

The case highlights the tension between federal interest in election integrity and the practical limits of judicial remedies once voting has begun. Gleason’s emphasis on voter secrecy and the absence of a feasible segregation method closed the door on the requested injunction.