Alaska’s decoy scandal brings back the usual suspects for shady election tactics

Alaska’s Senate race has been drawn into a dispute over two candidates named Dan Sullivan. Republican incumbent Daniel S. Sullivan faces Democrat Mary Peltola, while independent candidate Daniel J. Sullivan is also on the ballot. Reporting has linked Democratic operatives to efforts to recruit the second Sullivan, raising allegations that his candidacy was intended to confuse voters. Peltola has said she was not involved in his campaign. In an opinion column, Jonathan Turley argues that the reported involvement of lawyers associated with Marc Elias warrants scrutiny; that is his assessment, not an established finding of wrongdoing by Elias or his firm.

The Trump administration opened an investigation and sought to prevent certification of a result if the incumbent lost and voter confusion might have affected the outcome. A federal judge dismissed that lawsuit on 1 November, finding that the proposed handling of ballots would violate voters’ right to a secret ballot. Alaska officials say the ballot distinguishes the candidates, and the state’s ranked-choice system may limit the effect of mistaken first choices. Whether any voters were confused, or whether the recruitment broke a law, remains unresolved. The case has also revived scrutiny of ballot-shaping tactics used by both parties.