Justice Department overreaches by demanding split Alaska ballots

By Adele Rutherford · Reporting from Atlanta · October 31, 2026

The Justice Department asks a federal court to segregate ballots in Alaska, substituting federal muscle for state election law under a flawed reading of statutes.

Federal overreach into state-run election machinery

The Department of Justice under the Trump administration has crossed a constitutional line. It asked a federal court to order Alaska election officials to segregate all ballots ranking Senate candidate Dan J. Sullivan. Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward wrote in a court filing to preserve and segregate these specific ballots. The filing cited potential voter confusion between the candidate and the Republican incumbent, Sen. Dan S. Sullivan. CNBC reported that U.S. Attorney Michael Heyman confirmed an ongoing criminal and civil investigation into the race. This maneuver relies on a federal civil lawsuit filed by the administration against the state of Alaska. The suit invokes the National Voter Registration Act and the Supremacy Clause to block certification if the incumbent loses.

The strongest opposing case argues that the federal government has both the power and the duty to step in. It asserts this duty when election integrity is compromised by deliberate fraud. As ABC News noted, the recruitment of Daniel J. Sullivan was described as cheating and fraud. A New York Times report alleged that aides to Democratic candidate Mary Peltola and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee helped recruit the retired teacher to enter the race. In this view, a same-named spoiler candidate designed to siphon votes creates a species of electoral corruption. That corruption mocks the right to vote. Proponents of this intervention argue that waiting until after the ballots are counted is too late. The damage to the electoral process becomes irreversible once certification occurs.

That argument misreads both the limits of federal statutory authority and the mechanism of United States v. Classic (1941). In Classic, the Supreme Court held that the Constitution empowered Congress to regulate primaries and nominations. This regulatory power applies when state law makes them an integral part of the election machinery, protecting the right of participation from corruption. Classic involved explicit statutory authority over designated federal election steps. It did not authorize an executive agency to invent a novel civil cause of action under voter registration laws to police candidate recruitment. The National Voter Registration Act governs voter rolls. It does not govern candidate qualifying or name similarities on state ballots. State election officials rightly pointed out in court filings that the amended lawsuit rests on a meritless theory. The registration law has nothing to do with this dispute.

The danger of federal tools in partisan hands

Intervening in a state Senate contest days before an election sets a terrible precedent. The federal administration did this through civil lawsuits and grand jury subpoenas. ABC News reported that the Justice Department issued at least three dozen new subpoenas and document preservation requests. These requests targeted campaign offices in a race where President Donald Trump has publicly urged legal action. This invokes the shadows of the 2020 United States presidential election. In that election, novel legal filings sought to halt certification based on contested claims of fraud. Federal prosecutors should not supervise state ballot sorting under the guise of an ongoing criminal probe. That tool will eventually be held by your political opponents.

Test every shortcut against the day the other side holds the tool. Consider a Democratic administration dispatching the Justice Department to sequester ballots whenever a third-party candidate shares a name with an incumbent. Conservatives would rightly denounce that as an intolerable usurpation of state sovereignty. Alaska utilizes ranked-choice voting, a system where voters rank candidates. Four individuals qualified for this ballot. The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed that Daniel J. Sullivan's candidacy was legal. The state Division of Elections previously reviewed the matter. State courts and state election officials are charged with managing candidate qualifications. Federal prosecutors are not.

Respecting the boundary between state and federal power

The Department of Justice should be protecting voting rights. It should not manufacture civil remedies out of voter registration statutes to rescue a struggling incumbent. As CBS News observed, Daniel J. Sullivan is a retired Petersburg school teacher. He found himself at the center of a federal lawsuit after reports surfaced about his recruitment. Governor Mike Dunleavy ordered a state investigation into whether state laws were violated. That inquiry belongs with local authorities. Federal prosecutors should not leverage grand jury subpoenas against political campaigns just before Election Day.

The capital stock of institutional legitimacy spends fast and refills slowly. Federal prosecutors spend public trust on a partisan gamble when they brush past the traditional rule for sensitive investigative steps. That is what happened here. The Department of Justice had no statutory authority to file this lawsuit. The federal district court should dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. Federal courts must leave state election administration to the states. Voters must be allowed to cast their ballots without federal monitors segregating their choices based on speculative claims of confusion.

Justice Department overreaches by demanding split Alaska ballots

Federal overreach into state-run election machinery

The danger of federal tools in partisan hands

Respecting the boundary between state and federal power

Sources