DOJ sues to block certification of Alaska Senate result if Sullivan loses; Trump says he ordered it (Oct. 22-23, 2026) Case On Oct. 22, 2026, about 12 days before the midterms, the Justice Department sued Alaska in federal court to bar certification of the U.S. Senate result if a Democratic win occurs while a second candidate named Dan Sullivan stays on the ballot. Trump said Oct. 23 he ordered the suit. Election-law experts quoted by the Alaska Beacon and the Associated Press called the legal theory very weak; DOJ says it is acting under the National Voter Registration Act to protect election integrity. What happened (Oct. 22-23, 2026) Late on Thursday, Oct. 22, 2026, the Justice Department filed United States v. State of Alaska in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska, naming the state Division of Elections as defendant; the case was referred to Judge Sharon Gleason. The suit asks the court to keep Alaska from certifying the U.S. Senate result until an investigation determines whether votes cast for independent candidate Daniel J. Sullivan were meant for incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan; reporting describes it as aimed at a result in which Democrat Mary Peltola wins while Daniel J. Sullivan is on the ballot. ABC News reports DOJ filed before the election, citing voter confusion over the name. The complaint states: "The United States accordingly brings this lawsuit to protect the integrity of the 2026 Senate election in Alaska." DOJ cites the National Voter Registration Act, and the Alaska Beacon reports the claim rests on the law's preamble about protecting the integrity of the electoral process. Asked about the suit on Friday, Oct. 23, in Florida, Trump said: "I'm the one that said, 'do it.'" In a social media post earlier in the week, Trump wrote: "We are looking at powerful legal options to remove the fraudulent Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. from the Ballot." Earlier, on June 15, 2026, the Alaska Division of Elections removed Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired teacher from Petersburg, from the race after complaints from Sen. Sullivan and the Alaska Republican Party, which called him a "sham candidate." On June 26 Anchorage Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews ruled the removal unlawful, writing that the statute "does not authorize the removal of a candidate who satisfies the legal qualifications for office." The Alaska Beacon's site also carries a June 29 headline saying the Alaska Supreme Court ruled him eligible; that article's text was not read here. Daniel J. Sullivan appears with no party label, while Sen. Sullivan is listed as the Republican. Under Alaska's ranked-choice system voters can pick both Sullivans. A Public Policy Polling survey earlier in October, as reported by Al Jazeera, showed Peltola ahead by one point, within the margin of error. Attorney General Todd Blanche said on Wednesday that DOJ does not intend to improperly interfere with elections or state certification outside extreme circumstances. Responses Sen. Sullivan's campaign: a person affiliated with it said he did not ask DOJ to sue and was surprised; spokesman Nate Adams said the campaign would "let the DOJ complaint run its course." Peltola's campaign called the suit a political threat to overturn an election; the Alaska Democratic Party chair said Sen. Sullivan was looking to "any corrupt, desperate method to win." That is the party chair's characterization, not a finding. Daniel J. Sullivan has said he decided to run on his own; he declined immediate comment on the suit. Brennan Center senior counsel Lauren Miller Karalunas said states handle certification and the federal government has no role in it, and that state processes include safeguards against manipulation. Notre Dame law professor Derek Muller said the statute "simply doesn't let the Department of Justice enjoin certification" and predicted likely dismissal; he said the suit could also become moot after a wide Democratic or narrow Republican win. Former Alaska state elections attorney Libby Bakalar called the argument laughably bad, per the Alaska Beacon. Al Jazeera reports Democrats and voting-rights groups worry the administration may try to interfere in other midterm races; as of the reports reviewed (Oct. 23), no court ruling on the suit had been reported and the allegations and arguments are unadjudicated. Update (Oct. 26, 2026): judge fast-tracks dismissal motions On Monday, Oct. 26, 2026, U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason issued an order expediting consideration of the motions to dismiss, saying she intended to rule by Wednesday at 5 p.m. local time on a request from outside parties to join the case. She noted the suit was filed on Oct. 22, after Alaskans had begun voting and about four months after the Alaska Supreme Court ordered Daniel J. Sullivan onto the ballot. ABC News described her as signaling considerable skepticism of DOJ's approach; she has not ruled on the merits. According to Democracy Docket, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and Peltola's campaign filed a motion to dismiss and to intervene, and Alaska Elections Director Carol Beecher, a defendant, asked the court to dismiss the suit as lacking a legal basis and to rule by Nov. 2. The ruling could come before Election Day, Nov. 3. Perspectives Official position — Justice Department and Trump DOJ says the suit is brought, in its words, to protect the integrity of the 2026 Alaska Senate election, consistent with the National Voter Registration Act. Its position is that a second candidate with the same name as the incumbent could mislead voters and that the independent's candidacy is frivolous, and it points to Alaska election officials who described the campaign as meant to mislead voters. Attorney General Blanche said DOJ does not intend to improperly interfere with elections or certification outside extreme circumstances. Trump has called the second candidate fraudulent and said he told DOJ to proceed. Legal view — Election-law scholars and the Brennan Center Legal experts quoted in coverage say federal law gives DOJ no authority to enjoin state certification, that states run certification with their own safeguards, and that the case is likely to be dismissed or become moot. They also note that Alaska's courts already considered and rejected removing the second Sullivan from the ballot. Critic — Peltola campaign, DSCC and Alaska Democratic Party Democrats call the suit a sham and a political threat to overturn an election result before votes are cast, and say it is part of a broader pattern of administration involvement in midterm election administration. Editorial read — The Author (site author) The Author reads the president's own statement that he ordered the suit, together with legal experts' view that the statute gives DOJ no power to block certification, as an example of the Justice Department being used for a political party's electoral advantage. This is The Author's view, not a court or investigative finding. DOJ's stated position is that it is protecting voters from confusion, no court has ruled, and the suit may be dismissed or become moot. Research notes Open checks: Judge Gleason's rulings on intervention and the motions to dismiss (expected before Nov. 3); whether the suit is dismissed or mooted; the text of the June 29 Alaska Supreme Court decision (headline seen, article not read). Lead to verify, not yet in the entry: CNBC's Oct. 28 headline says the New York Times reported that Peltola campaign aides helped recruit the second Dan Sullivan; the CNBC page could not be opened, so the details and the Peltola campaign's response were not reviewed. If confirmed, it belongs in the entry because it bears on the Republican claim that the second candidacy was a plant. Also unreviewed: a report that Alaska's Republican-led state government urged dismissal. Note DOJ says the suit protects election integrity from voter confusion; the plaintiffs' critics, including election-law scholars, say federal law gives DOJ no power to block state certification, and no court has ruled. Sources [1] Alaska Beacon (https://alaskabeacon.com/2026/10/23/trump-administration-sues-to-block-alaskas-us-senate-election-result-if-peltola-wins/) · 2026-10-23 [2] PBS NewsHour (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-administration-files-lawsuit-to-block-possible-democratic-win-in-alaska-senate-race) · 2026-10-23 [3] Al Jazeera (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/10/23/trump-administration-sues-to-block-possible-democratic-win-in-alaska) · 2026-10-23 [4] ABC News (https://abcnews.com/US/doj-preemptively-sues-block-alaska-senate-results-republican/story?id=137512876) · 2026-10-23 [5] Alaska Beacon (June 2026 ruling on removal of Dan J. Sullivan) (https://alaskabeacon.com/?p=27019) · 2026-06-26 [6] ABC News — Judge appears skeptical of DOJ's legal maneuvering in Alaska lawsuit (https://abcnews.com/Politics/judge-appears-skeptical-dojs-legal-maneuvering-alaska-lawsuit/story?id=137590192) · 2026-10-26 [7] Democracy Docket — Judge fast-tracks Democrats' bid to dismiss Trump's Alaska lawsuit (https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/judge-fast-tracks-democrats-bid-to-dismiss-trumps-alaska-lawsuit/) · 2026-10-26 Connections Related — Democratic leaders sue Trump, DOJ and DHS over threats to election officials and pressure to purge voters (filed Oct. 20, 2026) Democrats' Oct. 20 suit challenges DOJ and DHS election actions; the Alaska suit is a separate DOJ action two days later. Related — Election claims tracker: fraud allegations, federal actions and what the evidence shows (Nov. 2026 midterms) Candidate entry for the election-claims tracker (draft). Same context — Election denial and interference efforts before the Nov. 2026 midterms: pardons, the Tina Peters case, Georgia's federal-intervention letters and National Guard troops near a DC ballot box Another federal action on election administration ahead of the Nov. 2026 midterms.