DOJ sues to stop Alaska certifying a Sullivan loss, and Trump says he ordered it
The Justice Department asked a federal court to block certification of Alaska's Senate race if Sen. Dan Sullivan loses narrowly, and Trump told reporters, "I'm the one that said do it."

Alaska's Supreme Court rejected earlier efforts to remove Daniel J. Sullivan from the ballot, and the suit seeks to block certification only if Sen. Sullivan loses. [224][249]
The split Breitbart said the second Sullivan was "being propped up by left-wing Democrats" [341], CNN called the DOJ "the legal wing of Trump's political operation" [109], and Reason said "there is no legal basis for overturning congressional election results based on voter confusion" [303].
Open the record6 of 10 sides covered · facts and sources
The facts7 points
- The Justice Department filed suit in federal court in Alaska to block the state from certifying the U.S. Senate result if Sen. Dan Sullivan loses. The suit alleges that votes meant for the senator but cast for candidate Daniel J. Sullivan, a teacher, could change the outcome. (PBS NewsHour)
- Trump told reporters Friday, Oct. 23, that he directed the suit: "I'm the one that said do it." (PBS NewsHour)
- The Alaska Supreme Court previously rejected Republican efforts to remove Daniel J. Sullivan from the ballot. (PBS NewsHour)
Show 4 more factsShow fewer
- Daniel J. Sullivan appears on the ballot without a party designation. Sen. Sullivan is listed as the Republican incumbent. (PBS NewsHour)
- In the primary, Mary Peltola was the top vote-getter. Sen. Sullivan received more than 68,000 votes and Daniel J. Sullivan received 4,107, about 2% of the total. (PBS NewsHour)
- Attorney General Todd Blanche said: "It is not DOJ's intention to, and it's never our intention to, improperly interfere with elections or the state certification process." (PBS NewsHour)
- Election Day is Nov. 3, 2026. (PBS NewsHour)
How outlets handled it6 source groups · original passages and links
Democratic Socialist
“So, they've decided that if they lose that race, they're just going to try to sue themselves into a victory.”The Young Turks · framing the DOJ suit as a bid to reverse an expected Republican loss
“And no, you don't get to overturn an election and cry about it later because oh, somebody else had the same name.”The Young Turks · arguing a same-name candidate is no grounds for voiding a result
the Young Turks host said, adding that 28 states have same-surname candidates this year. Truthout tied the suit to Blanche's refusal to rule out disrupting certification and to polling that only 28 percent are confident Trump will accept the results.
Watch on YouTube ›Liberal
“They signal a very notable willingness by Trump's DOJ to engage in highly questionable behavior to try and put its thumb on the electoral scale for Trump and his fellow Republicans.”CNN · arguing the Alaska and California suits show DOJ tilting the election toward Republicans
“The 2020 election showed that lawsuits don’t need to succeed to have an impact.”CNN · warning that failed suits can still supply a pretext for further election interference
CNN's analysis said of the Justice Department. The camp paired Alaska with the California ballot letters as one pattern and quoted law professors calling the suit legally empty.
Read the original ›Center
“The statute simply doesn't let the Department of Justice enjoin certification,”Derek Muller, Notre Dame law professor, quoted by PBS NewsHour · arguing the DOJ suit lacks legal basis and will likely be dismissed
“Donald Trump knows that Dan Sullivan is going to lose the election, so now his Department of Justice is filing a sham lawsuit to overturn the will of Alaska voters and steal an election when he loses”Devan Barber, executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, quoted by PBS NewsHour · accusing Trump of using the DOJ to overturn an expected Senate loss
"kicking off what many fear could become a lengthy battle between the government and states over certifying an election where the president's party is struggling," the AP story on PBS wrote. Both wire outlets laid out the June court ruling and the ballot labels, and the BBC gave Daniel J.
Read the original ›Libertarian

“there is no legal basis for overturning congressional election results based on voter confusion, and any such action would likely violate the First Amendment”Reason Magazine (Volokh Conspiracy author) · arguing the DOJ suit has no legal footing and would be unconstitutional
“That preamble of course gives no power whatsoever to the federal government to do anything.”Reason Magazine (Volokh Conspiracy post, relaying Rick Hasen's analysis) · arguing the only legal basis DOJ cited, the National Voter Registration Act's preamble, gives it no power to block certification
Ilya Somin wrote at the Volokh Conspiracy. He framed the case as a First Amendment and states'-rights violation, citing the Constitution's Elections Clause, and treated voter confusion as one small case of general voter ignorance.
Read the original ›MAGA
“who is being propped up by left-wing Democrats due to sharing the same name as incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan”Breitbart News · asserting the second Sullivan is a Democratic-backed spoiler, the premise of the DOJ's case
Breitbart wrote of the challenger, citing his past votes for Peltola. The Daily Wire put "spoiler" in its headline but also called the suit "an unusual effort to intervene in the certification of a federal election before the results are known," a more cautious line than Breitbart's.
Read the original ›Identity
“I’m the one that said do it”Donald Trump, President, quoted by ICT News · admitting he personally ordered the DOJ to sue to block certification if Sullivan loses
“The Department of Justice should belong to the American people and is not – and should not – be Donald Trump’s political operation”Kalyn Free, Democratic National Committee member and former DOJ attorney, quoted by ICT News · arguing the suit uses the DOJ to preempt the outcome of a state election
Cherokee Nation citizen and former DOJ attorney Kalyn Free told ICT, which covered the race as a contest over whether Peltola, who is Yup'ik, can win. ICT also quoted Cherokee and Muscogee businessman Mike Stopp backing the suit and calling the second candidacy "an act of deception," a split inside one Native outlet.
Read the original ›






























