Namesake challenger to Alaska Senator Dan Sullivan allowed on primary ballot

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (CN) — How many Dan Sullivans is too many? The Alaska Supreme Court doesn’t see an issue with two on the same primary ballot.

The Alaska Division of Elections, as well as the state’s Republican Party, sought to ban Dan J. Sullivan from competing against incumbent U.S. Senator Dan S. Sullivan, but the Alaska Supreme Court ruled Monday that the challenging Sullivan has the right to run.

“This matter is remanded for the Division of Elections to determine, in the first instance, how appellee Sullivan shall be listed as a candidate within the confines of existing Alaska ballot design law,” the Supreme Court wrote in a brief order. The full opinion will be available in the near future, Chief Justice Susan Carney said.

The court expedited the case to give the elections division enough time to prepare for the upcoming August primary elections.

The elections division had disqualified the challenger Sullivan on “good faith” grounds, its lead counsel Christopher Murray told the Supreme Court on Monday.

Murray argued that Dan J. Sullivan was not seriously intending to become a U.S. Senator, and said the election division’s choice to disqualify the challenger was meant to “protect the right to vote” from a campaign “designed to frustrate.”

“The ability of the public to choose for themselves will be harmed,” Murray said.

The senator and other Republicans have accused Dan J. Sullivan of only running as part of a Democrat plot to sow confusion and tip the scales in favor of Democratic former U.S. Representative Mary Peltola, the senator’s main rival for the competitive seat — one that could help Democrats regain a majority.

With Alaska’s ranked choice primary, the four candidates with the most votes will advance to the November general election, regardless of party affiliation.

In a statement at the beginning of June, Carmela Warfield, chairman of the Alaska Republican Party, called for an investigation into the new Sullivan. She claimed that when he registered, his party was undeclared and he had no affiliation with the Alaska Republican Party.

But on Monday, the challenger Sullivan’s attorney, Jeffrey Robinson, cited the qualifications clause of the U.S. Constitution, which defines three necessary attributes for an electable congressmember: an age minimum, U.S. citizenship and jurisdictional residency.

Nowhere, Robinson pointed out, exists a “good faith” candidacy qualification.

Justice Aimee Oravec seemed to agree.

“Where’s the statutory authority to divine the intent of a candidate? People run for office for different reasons,” she said. “There’s no limiting principle.”

Anchorage Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews had previously ruled in Dan J. Sullivan’s favor after the candidate appealed the election division’s move to boot him from the race.

In a statement, the challenger Sullivan said, “My team and I are grateful for the Alaska Supreme Court’s careful and timely attention to this important expedited matter, and its decision to affirm Judge Matthews’ well-reasoned, thorough order vacating the Division’s unlawful decision to exclude me as a candidate. We expect that the Division will act in full compliance with existing Alaska ballot design law in its preparation of the ballots.”

The senator’s campaign did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

In an ironic twist that Republicans have seemingly ignored, the sitting senator, who hails from Ohio originally, was not the first Republican Dan Sullivan in recent Alaskan politics.

Dan A. Sullivan was mayor of Anchorage from 2009 to 2015 and served on the Anchorage Assembly — the municipality’s city council — for nine years prior to that.

That Dan Sullivan also ran for senator in 2016 before dropping out under “mystery” circumstances. Had he stayed in the race and defeated current Senator Lisa Murkowski, he could have gone to Congress with Dan S. Sullivan, giving Alaska an all-Sullivan Senate delegation.