Latest Coverage
See all articles
Judge allows namesake challenger to Sen. Dan Sullivan to appear on Alaska ballot
An Anchorage Superior Court judge on Friday ruled that a challenger to U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan is eligible to run for office and be placed on the Aug. 18 primary ballot. The two share the same name and party affiliation.
The Alaska Division of Elections is seeking to keep the namesake challenger off the ballot, and immediately appealed the lower court decision to the Alaska Supreme Court, which has scheduled a hearing in the case at 10 a.m. Monday.
The deadline for the state to begin printing ballots is midday Tuesday, driving an expedited hearing schedule.
Dan J. Sullivan, 70 and a retired teacher from Petersburg, appealed to the Superior Court after the Alaska Division of Elections earlier this month rejected his bid to run for office.
The disqualification came after the division received formal complaints from the Alaska Republican Party and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. They alleged that Democrats had encouraged Dan J. Sullivan to run, in order to benefit the incumbent senator’s top opponent, Democratic former U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola.
Matthews wrote that “Because the Court has determined the Division’s decision to exclude Mr. Sullivan from the primary ballot was based on a ‘good-faith’ requirement that does not appear in the U.S. Constitution, the Alaska Statutes, or the implementing regulations adopted by the Division, the Division’s decision must be reversed.”
Alaska Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher, a Republican, had determined that Dan J. Sullivan’s declaration of candidacy was not filed in good faith.
Attorneys for the state said it was unprecedented to have two similarly named candidates running for the same seat.
They argued that the state has the authority under the U.S. Constitution to manage how elections are held and that Dan J. Sullivan wants to “deliberately to confuse voters” by attempting to run as a Republican against U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan, also a Republican.
Sen. Sullivan, running for his third term, has also complained that the challenger is trying to trick voters. Petersburg Sullivan has denied that, and said he’s running because the senator has done a poor job serving Alaskans.
Judge Matthews disagreed with the state’s argument that Petersburg Sullivan was trying to mislead voters.
“The Director’s assertion that Mr. Sullivan seeks to confuse or misguide voters is not supported by a preponderance of evidence,” Matthews wrote. “The Division accepted at face-value the assertions of the complaint, and disregarded Mr. Sullivan’s assertions.”
Jeffrey Robinson, an attorney for Dan J. Sullivan, argued in the case that the challenger met all qualifications in the U.S. Constitution to run for office. State regulations call for the use of middle initials to distinguish candidates in situations like these, he said.
The U.S. Constitution requires that candidates for U.S. Senate be at least 30 years old, have been a U.S. citizen for at least nine years, and inhabit the state they seek to represent at the time of the election.
Matthews this week agreed to expedite a decision, citing “great public interest.”
The Alaska race could help determine control of the U.S. Senate in the November elections.
Under Alaska’s election laws, all candidates will appear on the same Aug. 18 primary ballot. The top four vote-getters, regardless of party affiliation, will advance to the November general election.
Attorneys from both sides presented oral arguments in a hearing on Thursday that was live-streamed online.
Matthews reached a decision in the case less than 48 hours after the hearing was held.
“Director Beecher in essence found that Mr. Sullivan lacked a particular quality or fitness, specifically a ‘good-faith’ intention, and for this reason alone de-certified his candidacy for office,” Matthews wrote.
“Because the Director relied on a qualification outside of the three qualifications specified in Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution, the court finds that the Division’s ‘good-faith’ requirement is unlawful," Matthews wrote.
Daily News reporter Iris Samuels contributed.