The Alaska Division of Elections took action to disqualify a man named Dan Sullivan from running on the ballot against the incumbent Republican senator of the same name — but a lawyer advising the state legislature is now warning this was probably illegal.
According to Alaska Public Media, "Andrew Dunmire, an attorney with the nonpartisan Legislative Affairs Agency, wrote a nearly five-page memo on the controversy." According to the report, the other Sullivan, who lives in Petersburg, "appears to meet the three qualifications the U.S. Constitution requires of senators, Dunmire said: He’s over 30, a U.S. citizen for nine years or more, and a state resident."
The Division of Elections ruled Sullivan ineligible because he had not filed in "good faith," and there was strong evidence he was deliberately trying to confuse voters into splitting the vote to boost Democrats.
But that isn't a valid disqualification reason, Dunmire argued: “To impose additional requirements on Mr. Sullivan — such as a requirement that he filed to run ‘in good faith’ — would improperly add to the exclusive list of Constitutional qualifications.”
Additionally, Dunmire argued, the Division of Elections made the opposite argument in 2024, "when the Division argued in court that it had to let Eric Hafner, a federal inmate in New York, appear on the Alaska ballot as a Democrat," potentially taking votes away from other Democratic candidates, despite the state Democratic Party complaining he wouldn't meet the residency requirement because of the length of his sentence.
The other Sullivan, who is also running as a Republican denies that he is a Democratic plant or that his candidacy is meant to deceive anyone, and Dunmire argued that there are sensible compromises where Sullivan could be allowed onto the ballot but displayed in a way that voters would not confuse him for the sitting senator.