“Decoy Dan” can appear on Alaska’s primary ballot, according to an 11th-hour ruling that saved the campaign of a Senate candidate accused of being a political con man.
On Monday, the Alaska Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s ruling that Daniel J. Sullivan should not have been decertified by the state’s top election official, who found the “Republican” is running merely to “confuse or mislead and to thereby compromise the ballot’s fairness or neutrality.”
‘He’s in it to Rig it’
Sullivan, who admitted to working with a political strategist who is “a known longtime supporter of Democratic candidates,” is challenging Alaska’s incumbent senator — who happens to also be named Dan Sullivan. He also unsuccessfully sought to use the middle initial “S.” on the ballot, which would have matched Sen. Sullivan’s middle initial. He claimed that was a mistake.
“That you chose the occasion of your declaration of candidacy for U.S. Senate to seek ballot access under a name you have not used in your interactions with the [Election] Division suggests — and in combination with the additional facts I outline in this letter leads me to conclude — that you are seeking to confuse yourself with another candidate in the race, the incumbent Senator Dan Sullivan, rather than distinguish yourself from him,” Alaska Director of Elections Carol Beecher wrote last week in a stinging rebuke.
“Decoy Dan,” as his critics call him, had never been affiliated with Alaska’s GOP. That changed just two days before he filed his declaration of candidacy, the Election Division’s records show. And his campaign website, curiously, looks a lot like the senator’s, Beecher wrote. Beecher noted Dan J. Sullivan’s ties to Amber Lee, “an Alaska Democratic consultant who has previously supported [former Rep. Mary Peltola, D-Alaska],” Fox News reported.
But Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews in a ruling Friday ordering the challenger back on the ballot found Beecher failed to follow the state constitution, Alaska statute, and her office’s guidance in removing the second Sullivan.
“Instead, the decision was based upon a new, previously unstated, ‘good faith’ criteria,” the judge wrote.
The state’s high court backed Matthews on Monday, remanding its decision back to Beecher’s office “to determine in the first instance” how the reinstated candidate will be listed “as a candidate within the confines of existing Alaska ballot design law.” The court said it will issue a full opinion at a later time.
Alaska’s primary isn’t until Aug. 18, but the deadline for filing is Tuesday so that elections officials have enough time to print ballots, according to Fox News.
Sullivan, the two-term Alaska senator, previously told Fox News Digital that his challenger’s goal isn’t to win an election, “it’s to confuse Alaskans and rig the vote for my opponent, the Democrat” Peltola, who Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., helped recruit. “He’s not in it to win it. He’s in it to rig it.”
The elections director identified other reasons to doubt the legitimacy of the candidacy – including mimicking the incumbent Senator’s design and color scheme on a website, metadata in electronic filings that included the name of a Democratic consultant, no previous affiliation with the Republican Party, and others.
‘Intent on Deceiving’
As Derek Muller recently wrote in the Election Law Blog, booting off the ballot a candidate who is not acting in “good faith” is nothing new.
“When a woman changed her name to Carol Moseley Braun, then later attempted to appear on the ballot, Illinois kicked her off,” Muller noted. “Name changes are, of course, an extreme version of this problem.”
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Bullock v. Carter that “a State has an interest, if not a duty, to protect the integrity of its political processes from frivolous or fraudulent candidacies.”
Election integrity watchdog Honest Elections Project filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, arguing Decoy Dan should remain off the state’s primary ballot. HEP Executive Director Jason Snead said state elections officials have the authority and the duty to protect the integrity of Alaska elections.
“Fortunately, the Court left discretion for election officials to clearly mark this imposter candidate in a way that distinguishes him from the sitting senator whose supporters he seems intent on deceiving,” Snead said in a press release following Monday’s ruling. “That is the bare minimum the integrity of our elections demands, and I applaud Alaska election officials for taking this issue incredibly seriously.”
Nate Adams, the senator’s campaign spokesman, said the ruling is disappointing because it’s clear that the “sham candidate” is running to “deceive voters and manipulate Alaska’s election system.
“However, we are encouraged by the fact that the Director of the Division of Elections will be able to use her expertise to differentiate between the Petersburg fraud and the incumbent – Senator Dan Sullivan – to the benefit of Alaska voters,” Adams said in a statement.
The challenger Sullivan told the Alaska Beacon that he’s glad the legal battle is over.
“It was pretty stressful. I’ve got to admit that,” the 69-year-old retired teacher said.
Alaska in the National Spotlight
The ballot battle has drawn national attention, with the Republican National Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee weighing in. More than a dozen GOP-controlled states filed amicus briefs in the case.
They argued that the Sullivan kerfuffle could mistakenly draw votes from the incumbent senator, which could prove costly in Alaska’s “nonpartisan” Senate primary. The Sullivans are among 16 candidates vying for the seat, including Peltola. The top-four finishers will face off in Alaska’s controversial ranked-choice general election in November.
With political control of the Senate at stake in November, Alaska could play a pivotal role in the power struggle.
