Trump administration files lawsuit to block possible Democratic win in Alaska Senate race

On Friday, President Donald Trump announced that the Justice Department had filed a lawsuit in Anchorage to stop Alaska from certifying the result of its 2026 U.S. Senate race if Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan loses. The suit, which hinges on the presence of a second candidate named Dan Sullivan, could trigger a protracted legal showdown between the federal government and state election officials.

The complaint was filed on Thursday in federal court and was publicly announced on Friday when Trump landed for a campaign rally in Florida. In a brief statement, the president told reporters, “I’m the one that said do it,” a phrase echoed by the DOJ’s own press release. The suit demands that the state be barred from certifying a Mary Peltola win “pending an investigation to determine whether votes cast for Daniel J. Sullivan were meant to be cast for Senator Sullivan.”

Media additions

Trump says he ordered DoJ to file lawsuit to block Alaska Senate results certification

Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired teacher from Petersburg, appeared on the ballot without a party designation, while incumbent Dan S. Sullivan was listed as the Republican incumbent. In the August primary, Sullivan received 68,000 votes, whereas Daniel J. Sullivan garnered 4,107 votes — about 2 % of the total. Mary Peltola, the former congresswoman, was the top vote‑getter in the nonpartisan primary. The race is expected to be decided by a narrow margin in a state of roughly 738,000 voters.

In response, Sen. Sullivan’s spokesperson Nate Adams said the campaign would let the DOJ complaint “run its course” and that Alaskans could differentiate between the two Sullivans. Sullivan himself has not publicly commented on the lawsuit.

The United States Department of Justice, in its filing, stated that it was acting to protect the “integrity of the 2026 Senate election in Alaska.” The complaint was signed by Associate U.S. Attorney General Stanley Woodward, who has represented Trump allies and Jan. 6 defendants in the past. U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche, speaking before the lawsuit was filed, said the DOJ had no intention to improperly interfere with elections, adding that the agency would not pursue such actions outside of “extreme circumstances.”

Alaska’s ranked‑choice system, which the state is also campaigning to repeal, adds another layer of potential confusion. If Daniel J. Sullivan is eliminated early in the count, his votes could be redistributed to Dan S. Sullivan, potentially altering the outcome. The DOJ’s argument hinges on the possibility that a narrow Republican loss could be overturned if the second Sullivan’s votes were deemed miscast.

Some observers point to a broader pattern. Last month, the Trump administration filed a lawsuit in California seeking to segregate ballots from up to 20,000 voters the DOJ claimed might be non‑citizens. California officials said many of those identified were citizens and that the lawsuit was based on flawed data. Legal experts have warned that the administration’s recent filings could be politically motivated and unlikely to succeed.

The timing of the lawsuit, just 11 days before the November 3 election, has raised concerns about the potential for a rushed legal process. If the DOJ’s request to block certification is granted, the state would have to halt the formal declaration of a winner, potentially leading to a protracted federal court battle. The federal court will need to decide whether the DOJ’s claims are legally sound, a question experts predict will be answered in the coming weeks.

Alaska’s Senate race is being watched nationwide because it could tip the balance of the chamber. If Mary Peltola were to win, she would be the first Democrat to hold the seat in 18 years. The DOJ’s intervention could, therefore, have implications far beyond the state, affecting the composition of the Senate and the President’s agenda.

What to Watch Next

• The federal court’s decision on whether to grant the DOJ’s preliminary injunction.
• Alaska’s election officials’ response to the lawsuit and any potential appeals.
• Potential actions by the U.S. Senate, which has the authority to seat or unseat members, should the election outcome be contested.
• Any further lawsuits from the Trump administration targeting other states’ election certifications.

As the November election approaches, Alaskans and national observers alike will be watching how the federal government’s attempt to intervene in a state election unfolds. The outcome will set a precedent for the extent of federal influence over state‑level electoral processes and could shape the political landscape for years to come.