The Justice Department treats federal courts as campaign tools

By Adele Rutherford · Reporting from Atlanta · November 3, 2026

By filing late lawsuits in Alaska and California, the Department of Justice abandoned legal procedure for political theater, setting a shortcut that will eventually be turned against its own authors.

Procedure is the shield we have

A court on Forsyth Street looks much the same whether you win or lose. The limestone pillars do not lean toward the petitioner. The Eleventh Circuit clerk's desk smelled of old paper in December 2000, just as it does today. Procedure—the formal rules governing judicial proceedings—is where power actually lives. In mid-October, the Department of Justice filed suit to block certification of the Alaska Senate race. Certification is the formal confirmation of election results by designated officials. The department also sought to set aside mail ballots in California. In doing so, it abandoned law for political theater. The Atlantic reported that the department sued multiple states over election processes. It charged more than 100 people with alleged voter fraud. It also targeted Democratic Representative Ilhan Omar and former FBI Director James Comey. Free Malaysia Today and Dawn noted that the Justice Department was led by a close ally of Donald Trump. It filed suit to block certification in Alaska if Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan narrowly loses. RTÉ and Free Malaysia Today added that a court ruled against this effort on election eve. The Supreme Court rejected an emergency bid to set aside mail-in ballots from as many as 20,000 potential noncitizens in California. A rule that works only when your side holds power is no rule at all. The Department of Justice treated the bench as a campaign stop. It forgot that when opponents hold the tool, shortcuts cut both ways.

The mechanics of the late docket

The opposing argument holds that the executive branch must secure voter rolls and prevent vote dilution. As reported by The Atlantic, the department argued California risked sending mail ballots to as many as 20,000 potential noncitizens. It claimed Alaska risked voter confusion by placing Independent candidate Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. alongside Republican Senator Daniel S. Sullivan. The New York Times reported that Democratic operatives encouraged Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. to run. The Guardian noted Mary Peltola's campaign recruited a candidate sharing her opponent's name. This argument sounds plausible in a press release, but it collapses against the record. More than two dozen courts rejected the department's demands for voter information, as noted by The Atlantic. The Alaska Supreme Court rejected challenges against placing Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. on the ballot. Federal courts then dismissed the eleventh-hour bids to halt certifications. This was not a good-faith defense of the franchise. During the January 6 Capitol attack, attackers sought to prevent Congress from counting Electoral College votes. Now the Department of Justice uses late litigation to challenge election outcomes after ballots are cast.

The cost of spending capital

Legitimacy is a capital stock that spends fast and refills slowly. For decades, the Department of Justice maintained a strict policy against taking influential action shortly before an election. When an administration treats the attorney general's office as a campaign tool, it burns through public trust. The record shows that the department sought a national voter roll database by September 2025. It sued eight states to compel disclosure of confidential voter data. It also submitted an amicus brief—a submission by a non-party to advise the court—in Louisiana v. Callais. In that brief, it argued that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional in practice. This effort goes beyond ballots in California or candidates in Alaska. It constructs an apparatus of doubt. As reported by RTÉ, Free Malaysia Today, and Dawn, Donald Trump stated on a podcast, "I veto everything," regarding losing control of Congress. In doing so, he treated legal machinery as an instrument of unilateral will. This pattern culminated in the January 6 Capitol attack. There, a mob sought to prevent Congress from counting Electoral College votes. A constitutional republic cannot endure an executive branch that treats legal motions as political favors.

The Department of Justice broke institutional norms to manufacture pretexts for overriding election results. The federal courts were correct to reject them.

The Justice Department treats federal courts as campaign tools

Procedure is the shield we have

The mechanics of the late docket

The cost of spending capital

Sources