JUNEAU, Alaska — An Alaska judge has determined that a man who shares both a name and party affiliation with Republican U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan has the right to appear on the state’s August primary ballot.
Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews issued the ruling Friday, reversing a June 15 decision by Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher, who had moved to bar the challenger from the ballot. The ruling remains subject to appeal before the state Supreme Court.
State attorneys have indicated that Tuesday represents the final deadline for a ruling to be in place so that ballots for the August 18 primary can be sent to print.
Judge Matthews found that the Division of Elections’ move to exclude Dan J. Sullivan on the grounds that his candidacy lacked “good faith” had no basis in the state Constitution, Alaska law, or the Division’s own rules. “Instead, the decision was based upon a new, previously unstated, ‘good faith’ criteria,” the judge wrote.
The situation involving the two Dan Sullivans has drawn attention to the high stakes surrounding the incumbent senator’s reelection bid. Alaska’s Senate race is among roughly half a dozen contests across the country expected to be fiercely contested this fall, and it represents a seat Democrats are hoping to capture as part of their push to reclaim a Senate majority.
The senator, along with supporters including the National Republican Senatorial Committee, has spoken out against the challenger’s entry into the race, arguing it risks confusing voters. Under Alaska’s election rules, the top four finishers in the primary — regardless of party — advance to a ranked choice general election in November.
Sen. Sullivan has accused the challenger of working in concert with Democrats and the campaign of Democratic former U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola — widely seen as the senator’s primary competition — in an effort to muddy the waters and improve Peltola’s prospects. Peltola’s campaign, state Democrats, and the challenger himself have all denied those claims.
Sen. Sullivan and Peltola are the most prominent figures in the crowded field and the only candidates who have reported raising campaign funds.
Director Beecher had concluded that the challenger’s filing was not made in good faith and was instead intended to mislead voters. She pointed to the fact that he had been registered to vote as Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. and switched his party affiliation to Republican when he filed for the race. She also noted similarities between his campaign website and the senator’s, along with his use of a political consultant who has worked with Democratic clients. She did not cite any direct evidence of coordination with the senator’s opponents.
In their effort to uphold the disqualification, state attorneys rejected the idea that ballot design could adequately address any confusion created by two candidates with identical names and party labels running for the same office. “The Constitution does not require States to place a sham candidate on the ballot and then attempt to mitigate the damage through design choices,” wrote attorney Rachel Witty of the Alaska Department of Law, along with outside attorneys Christopher Murray and Michael Francisco.
Attorneys representing the challenger countered that the U.S. Constitution sets out only three qualifications for Senate candidates — age, citizenship, and residency — and argued that Director Beecher had no legal authority to remove their client from the ballot.
The challenger Sullivan, a 69-year-old retired teacher and former U.S. Forest Service employee, has acknowledged that having the same name and party as the sitting senator gave him “an instant megaphone.” He has said, however, that he had been considering a run for some time and had grown increasingly dissatisfied with the senator’s performance in office.
When the candidate list was initially published, the challenger appeared as Dan J. Sullivan, while the incumbent was listed as Dan S. Sullivan with a notation identifying him as the current officeholder.
