Judge Dismisses DOJ Suit to Delay Alaska Senate Certification

U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason dismissed a Justice Department lawsuit on 1 November 2026 that sought to delay certification of Alaska's U.S. Senate election if Republican incumbent Dan S. Sullivan lost. The court ruled that the federal government lacked standing and that the requested relief would violate the secret ballot. The Justice Department filed a notice of appeal the same day.

The suit, filed days before the election, asked the court to order Alaska to segregate ballots cast for Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., an unaffiliated candidate whose name is similar to the incumbent. The Department argued that voter confusion could affect the outcome and that an investigation should precede certification. Gleason, an Obama appointee, wrote that the United States provided no workable plan for segregating those ballots while preserving voter secrecy. She also noted that many ballots had already been cast and commingled.

The ballot lists the incumbent as Dan S. Sullivan (Registered Republican) Incumbent. The other candidate appears as Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. without party designation. Sullivan Jr., a retired teacher from Petersburg, changed his registration from Republican to undeclared before the general election. Alaska uses ranked-choice voting. The race is closely watched because control of the Senate is at stake in the 2026 midterms.

Gleason's order stated that the federal government failed to establish Article III standing. The relief sought would not redress any alleged injury without compromising the secret ballot. Late changes to election procedures are strongly disfavoured. Alaska state attorneys had argued that the demand to segregate ballots was not feasible.

The Justice Department spokesperson said Alaskan voters deserve a fair election and not to be misled. President Trump, speaking after landing in Iowa for a campaign rally, described the original suit as important. He said he had not yet seen the ruling. Separate federal and state investigations into the circumstances of the second candidate's entry continue, but those inquiries are distinct from the civil certification request.

Voting rights groups that intervened to defend Alaska called the ruling a rejection of an attempt to disrupt certification on the eve of the election. If Sullivan wins, or if the Democratic candidate Mary Peltola wins by a margin larger than the votes received by the namesake candidate, the appeal may become moot. The 9th Circuit has not yet set a schedule.

The decision leaves Alaska's normal certification timeline intact. Election officials will count ballots and declare a winner according to state law. The presence of two similarly named candidates on a ranked-choice ballot is unusual. The court's ruling turns on standing and secrecy rather than on the merits of any confusion claim.

No further order has altered the counting process as of 2 November. The appeal notice preserves the Department's ability to seek review, but the practical effect depends on the final margin. The immediate consequence is that certification will proceed without the segregation the Department requested.