Law / Politics

Add as a preferred source on Google

Peltola Campaign Seeks Faster Review in Alaska Election Lawsuit

The groups seek a decision this week on intervention and permission to file a dismissal motion, but the court has not adopted their proposed schedule.

Updated 2 min read
People enter the federal courthouse in Anchorage, Alaska, as election litigation proceeds. (AI-generated image / EconoTimes)
People enter the federal courthouse in Anchorage, Alaska, as election litigation proceeds. (AI-generated image / EconoTimes)

Alaskans for Mary and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee asked a federal judge to speed review of their effort to join an election lawsuit ahead of Alaska’s Nov. 3 Senate vote.

Alaskans for Mary is the campaign committee of Mary Peltola, the Democratic Senate candidate. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed the lawsuit Oct. 22. Alaskans for Mary and the DSCC sought to intervene Oct. 23, then asked permission to file a proposed motion to dismiss on Oct. 25. Their emergency motion asks the court to expedite consideration of both requests; the proposed dismissal motion is not yet before the judge for a ruling on its merits.

The emergency motion proposes that the DOJ and Alaska defendants respond by 9 p.m. ET Tuesday, Oct. 27 (5 p.m. Alaska Daylight Time), with a reply by 4 p.m. ET Wednesday, Oct. 28 (noon AKDT). It asks the judge to decide the requests this week. The schedule is requested, not court-set, and the motion says neither request had been granted.

The DOJ complaint seeks to withhold certification only if incumbent Sen. Dan S. Sullivan loses and counting every vote for candidate Daniel J. Sullivan as a vote for the senator would change the winner under Alaska’s ranked-choice count. It also asks for an investigation into whether voters who selected Daniel J. Sullivan meant to support the incumbent. The requested pause is conditional, and the complaint does not establish voter confusion.

Alaskans for Mary and the DSCC argue that the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), cited by the DOJ, does not authorize the federal government to intervene in state ballot and certification rules. Their proposed filing says, “The NVRA provides no legal basis for DOJ’s claim.” The court has not ruled on that argument.

The dispute concerns how votes for the two candidates named Sullivan could affect the ranked-choice result. The DOJ alleges candidate Daniel J. Sullivan’s candidacy could draw support from the incumbent; that remains an allegation, not a court finding. Reuters and CNBC have described the contest as potentially pivotal for control of the Senate.

Related articles

View all