The retired Petersburg teacher who shares the same first and last name as U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan is suing for the right to run against the sitting senator, claiming that there is no “good faith” requirement for him to appear on the ballot.
Daniel J. Sullivan, Jr. – a former Mary Peltola donor who now claims to be a Republican – has asked the Anchorage Superior Court to stay the Division of Elections’ June 15 decision disqualifying him from the August 18 state primary ballot for U.S. Senate or to issue a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction halting ballot printing until his appeal is resolved.
The Petersburg resident’s entry into what was expected to be a showdown between former Congresswoman Mary Peltola and Sen. Dan. S. Sullivan, has generated national attention with Republicans claiming Daniel Sullivan’s candidacy is an orchestrated attempt by Democrats to sow ballot confusion among voters.
In a June 22 motion, however, Daniel Sullivan’s attorneys argue that the Division exceeded its legal authority by imposing a subjective “good faith” requirement not found in the U.S. Constitution or Alaska law. The motion, which also seeks expedited consideration of the appeal, was served on the Alaska Attorney General’s office, Alaska Election Division Director Carol Beecher, and others.
Daniel Sullivan claims he submitted a complete and timely Declaration of Candidacy on May 29, certifying he meets the constitutional qualifications and is now affiliated with the Republican Party. The Division’s Final Decision did not dispute those facts or his Republican registration at the time of filing. It instead concluded the declaration “was not properly filed … because it was not filed in order to declare an actual good-faith candidacy … but was instead filed with a purpose to confuse or mislead and to thereby compromise the ballot’s fairness or neutrality.”
The ongoing drama began June 1, when the National Republican Senatorial Committee wrote Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom and Director Beecher, objecting to the candidacy on name-similarity grounds with incumbent U.S. Sen. Daniel S. Sullivan.
Dahlstrom then sent Daniel Sullivan a letter, noting that she had opened an investigation and demanding sworn answers to seven questions “under penalty of perjury.” Sullivan replied June 10, reaffirming his filing but declining to issue sworn responses. That same day, Alaska Republican Party Chair Carmela Warfield filed two candidate-eligibility complaints. The Division issued a preliminary decision on June 10 and the Final Decision five days later.
The June 15 ruling concludes that Daniel Sullivan’s declaration of candidacy was not filed in good faith to pursue the office but instead appears intended to confuse or mislead voters by mimicking the incumbent Sen. Dan Sullivan.
The Division’s disqualification of Daniel Sullivan rested on four facts suggesting intent to confuse voters: (1) requesting ballot name “Dan Sullivan” (or initially “Dan S. Sullivan”) despite registering as “Daniel J. Sullivan, Jr.”; (2) switching to Republican affiliation just two days before filing; (3) a campaign website similar in style and theme to the incumbent’s; and (4) using a consultant with strong Democratic ties.
Daniel Sullivan contends Alaska regulation limits the director’s review to qualifications actually addressed in a candidate’s declaration and specifies exactly what that declaration must contain. He argues that there is nothing requiring a “good faith … purpose of genuinely pursuing election.”
The complaint further states that the U.S. Constitution’s Qualifications Clause sets only three requirements – age, nine years’ citizenship, and inhabitancy when elected, and those qualifications are exclusive, the motion states.
It further asserts that exclusion from the ballot would cause irreparable harm to both Daniel Sullivan and voters – harm that cannot be remedied later without “throwing the election into chaos.”
ALASKA WATCHMAN DIRECT TO YOUR INBOX
As a remedy, the complaint claims the Elections Division could address any voter confusion concerns by simply printing the full names of each Dan Sullivan, thereby allowing the dueling campaigns to better differentiate themselves.
Whether that would clarify the issue for voters remains unclear.
The complaint comes amid rapidly approaching election deadlines. Federal and state law require absentee ballots for military and overseas voters by July 4; the Division plans to post sample ballots June 29 and begin advance mailings July 3. Without preliminary relief, Daniel Sullivan’s appeal would effectively need resolution by June 27.
7 Comments
Seems to me that trying to use the sitting Senator’s middle initial, he proved all on his own that he was up to no good. If he had any shame or ethics of any kind, he would quietly withdraw, but I suppose we can’t expect that sort of circumspection from leftist.
Democrats have no ethics. He’s not a Republican.
I’m inclined to agree with Decoy Dan on this one…
I’m afraid this is it for Alaska. We are “Kaput!” I know that if the case goes to the Supreme Court they’ll rule in favor of Decoy Dan. If they allow a felon who’s never been in the state, they’ll allow this.
Dee Cee I’m thinking you’re right. But I have faith that he will be keep off the ballot.
Yes the democrats Cheat, anyway they can.
If he remains on the ballot, I hope that the ballot includes “Hon. Sen Sullivan” for the incumbent, and simply Dan Sullivan for the Demi-Cheat.
> that there is no “good faith” requirement
That about sums up the democrat party. Thank you for the further clarity.