A federal judge in Anchorage on Sunday threw out the Justice Department’s lawsuit over Alaska’s two Dan Sullivans, and the department moved to appeal within hours, setting up a Ninth Circuit fight just as Alaskans head to the polls on Tuesday.
U.S. District Judge Sharon L. Gleason dismissed the suit, which sought to block certification of Alaska’s U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses, according to the Associated Press. In a 20-page order, Gleason wrote that the government lacked proper legal standing to bring the case, CBS News reported.
Peltola UPDATE: The Justice Department filed its notice of appeal on Sunday, hours after Judge Gleason dismissed its Alaska ballot lawsuit.
DOJ says Gleason dismissed on procedural grounds and never disputed its argument that Daniel J. Sullivan entered the race as a frivolous… https://t.co/FEZ7RLgXPJ
— The Scoop (@TheScoop_US) November 1, 2026
The lawsuit centered on a second candidate on the ballot, a teacher named Daniel J. Sullivan. The Justice Department alleged his candidacy was meant to confuse voters by running under the same ballot name as the incumbent, and argued that Democrat Mary Peltola would benefit, according to CBS News. Under the department’s request, certification would have been delayed only if Sen. Sullivan lost and moving every Daniel J. Sullivan vote to him would change the ranked-choice result, CNBC reported.
What the judge said
Gleason wrote that the Justice Department “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,” according to CBS News. She added that the government “failed to satisfy its burden to show that its alleged injury is redressable by a court order.”
“Requiring the segregation of ballots cast by voters for Daniel J. Sullivan so that these voters can be further investigated by law enforcement is not a remedy that this Court can or should order,” Gleason wrote, according to Democracy Docket.
The judge also noted that early voting was already underway and that ballots already cast had been commingled in a way that would keep officials from linking individual ballots to voters, CNBC reported. She refused to let the department amend its complaint again, calling further amendment futile, according to CNBC. The suit had been revised last week to add a Supremacy Clause claim and details from a New York Times report about the alleged recruitment of the second Sullivan, CNBC reported.
Notably, Gleason did not decide whether the second Sullivan had been recruited to confuse voters, according to CNBC. The Peltola campaign, state election officials and outside advocacy groups had asked the court to dismiss the case, CNBC reported.
DOJ: “Decoy Dan” argument still stands
The Justice Department filed a notice of appeal on Sunday, according to CBS News and a copy of the notice dated November 1 posted by Democracy Docket. The appeal goes to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, CNBC reported.
A department spokesperson said the court “dismissed the case on procedural grounds but did not dispute the argument of the United States that Daniel J. Sullivan (a/k/a Decoy Dan) entered the race as a frivolous candidate to confuse voters,” according to CBS News. “Alaskan voters deserve a fair election, not to be misled in an attempt to rig outcomes,” the spokesperson said, according to the Associated Press.
The ruling came two days after the U.S. Attorney for Alaska said there are ongoing criminal and civil investigations into the second Sullivan’s decision to run, CNBC reported. Sunday’s dismissal does not end those probes.
What comes next
With Election Day on Tuesday, the appeal leaves open whether a higher court will weigh in before Alaska certifies its results. For now, votes for both Sullivans will be counted under Alaska’s ranked-choice system with no court-ordered separation, according to the order as described by Democracy Docket. In one of the nation’s most closely watched Senate races, that question could matter if the margin is tight.
Sources
Sources cited
Sources
- Original post: The Scoop (@TheScoop_US) on X, Nov 1, 2026
Posts on X are shown as published by their authors; claims in them are attributed, not independently confirmed unless the article says so. If an embedded post does not load, these links open the originals.