The Justice Department’s lawsuit over Alaska’s Senate race has become one of the final flashpoints of the 2026 midterm campaign, and on Sunday the attorney general pushed back against the sharpest criticism of it.
Attorney General Todd Blanche said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that the lawsuit is not an attempt to give President Donald Trump control over a state election. “President Trump is not trying to take over a state election in any way, shape, or form,” Blanche said, according to Reuters. “We’re not laying any groundwork for the president to do that.”
What the lawsuit asks for
The Justice Department sued on Thursday in federal court in Anchorage, asking a judge to block Alaska from certifying the results of its Senate race if the Republican incumbent loses by a narrow margin. The department argues voters could be confused because two Republicans on the ballot have almost identical names.
Incumbent Republican Senator Dan S. Sullivan is running against Democrat Mary Peltola, a former U.S. representative. A third candidate, another Republican named Dan J. Sullivan Jr., is also on the ballot. The lawsuit alleges he is running “with the intention of misleading supporters of Senator Sullivan into voting for him,” and asks the court to block certification of an outcome “that may be impacted by voter confusion” so there can be “an investigation to determine whether votes cast for Daniel J. Sullivan were meant to be cast for Senator Sullivan.”
A Justice Department spokesperson said the agency is taking “necessary steps to ensure that this frivolous candidacy does not undermine the integrity of Alaska’s election or the will of its voters.”
Trump told reporters on Friday that he supported the lawsuit, saying “I’m the one that said do it.”
Why Alaska matters for Senate control
Control of the Senate could come down to Alaska, where Sullivan is running a closely contested race against Peltola. The November 3 midterms will decide control of Congress, and both parties are watching a small number of competitive Senate races that could tip the balance.
The Alaska suit is part of a broader, more aggressive approach to election oversight by the administration, Reuters reported. That approach has included pressing states for voter-registration data and arguing that stricter measures are needed to ensure public confidence in the vote. Critics, including both Democratic and some Republican election officials, view the moves as federal overreach.
The administration has also sued to stop California from counting certain mail-in ballots, and made a mostly unsuccessful attempt to force 30 states and the District of Columbia to provide complete voter rolls, Reuters reported.
The other side of the name dispute
Dan J. Sullivan has denied in interviews with U.S. news outlets that his aim is to cause confusion or divert votes from Dan S. Sullivan, Reuters reported. His campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
USA Today reported additional detail from the lawsuit: it contends Daniel J. Sullivan is running as a Republican despite being “a known longtime supporter of Democratic candidates,” and that his campaign website uses a format, color scheme and overall theme similar to the incumbent’s campaign website. USA Today also reported that Daniel J. Sullivan changed his registration between the primary and general elections and is running as unaffiliated with a party, and that Carol Beecher, the director of the state division of elections, determined on June 15 that Daniel J. Sullivan had not declared a “good-faith candidacy” but instead “filed with a purpose to confuse or mislead” voters.
What happens next
No ruling on the Alaska lawsuit had been reported as of Sunday. The case will be watched closely in the final days before November 3, not only for what it means for one Senate seat, but for what it signals about how post-election disputes could unfold if other races are close.
Election officials around the country have told Reuters they are preparing for potential federal interference in the midterms, including legal challenges and disputes over voting that could disrupt certification. The Justice Department’s position, as stated by Blanche, is that the Alaska action is specific to that state and to the confusion it says the similar names create.
For voters in Alaska, the practical question is simpler: whether the result they deliver on November 3 will be certified on the normal timetable, or held up in court while the meaning of votes cast for a similarly named candidate is litigated.
Sources: Reuters, “US Justice Dept sues to block possible Alaska election of Democrat to Senate” (Oct. 23, 2026) and “Trump has no designs on taking over state elections, US attorney general says” (Oct. 25, 2026); USA Today, “DOJ sues to block Alaska from certifying Senate race if Republican loses” (Oct. 23, 2026).
One thought on “Justice Department’s Alaska Lawsuit Draws a Denial From the Attorney General — Eight Days Before the Midterms”