Democrats, voting-rights groups challenge Trump's bid to block Alaska Senate certification

Democratic groups and voting-rights advocates are seeking to join a federal lawsuit to stop the Justice Department’s effort to prevent Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate election results if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses.

The requests come from Alaskans for Mary, the campaign for Democratic Senate candidate Mary Peltola, the Democratic Party’s Senate campaign committee, and a separate group including the League of Women Voters of Alaska, Common Cause and two individual voters.

Together, the groups argue that the executive branch lacks legal authority to intervene in state-run elections and is attempting an unprecedented override of state election administration with early voting already underway.

In court filings submitted Friday, the groups contend that the litigation — which President Donald Trump confirmed he personally ordered — seeks an extraordinary remedy: an investigation into whether voters who selected another candidate named Daniel J. Sullivan actually intended to vote for the incumbent senator.

Trump told reporters on Friday that he directed the Justice Department to file the lawsuit: “I’m the one that said ‘do it.'”

The move drew swift bipartisan backlash, including from Alaska’s Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who said on social media, “The Department of Justice should never have filed this lawsuit.”

The legal battle centers on Daniel J. Sullivan, a non-incumbent challenger sharing a near-identical name with incumbent GOP Senator Daniel S. Sullivan. Alaska election officials initially removed the challenger from the ballot after a complaint from the state Republican Party, but state courts ordered his inclusion on the ballot.

In June, the Alaska Supreme Court affirmed that decision and directed election officials to clearly distinguish the two men.

The ballot now lists Sen. Sullivan as the “incumbent” and Republican, while the other Sullivan has no party registration.

The Justice Department filed its lawsuit on Oct. 22, seeking an order to prevent Alaska from certifying the Senate election if the incumbent loses.

The proposed intervenors say the department’s approach would force Alaska voters to choose between electing the president’s preferred candidate and risking the state being barred from certifying its election results.

Peltola’s campaign and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee argue that the lawsuit directly threatens their interests because it could prevent Peltola from taking office even if she wins the election under Alaska’s ranked-choice system.

They also question whether Alaska state officials will mount a sufficiently vigorous defense, given that the state’s Division of Elections previously tried to exclude Daniel J. Sullivan from the ballot before a state court overturned the move.

The DSCC and Alaskans for Mary are asking the court to grant them defendant-intervenor status so they can formally file motions to dismiss the lawsuit.

The Democrats argue that while the DOJ has cited the National Voter Registration Act as the legal basis for its lawsuit, the statute contains no provision authorizing the federal government to dictate candidate eligibility or ballot layout, which are state matters under the Constitution.

Legal experts have echoed those concerns, noting that relying on the NVRA’s general preamble language to halt state election certification lacks precedent.

The League of Women Voters of AlaskaandCommon Causefiled separately, warning that the DOJ’s demand to investigate voter intent presents severe constitutional hazards.

The filings note that the DOJ has offered no mechanism to determine whether voters who selected Daniel J. Sullivan intended to vote for the incumbent.

Blocking certification, the groups argue, would disenfranchise Alaskans by denying them representation and injecting chaos into the election outcome.

Both organizations are asking the court for permission to join the case as defendants. The Democratic groups say they intend to seek dismissal if the court grants their motion.