In 60 seconds: A federal judge in Anchorage threw out the Trump administration's lawsuit seeking to block certification of Alaska's Senate race, ruling the government had no standing and no workable plan — two days before voters decide a race that could shape control of the Senate.
- Judge Sharon Gleason dismissed United States v. Alaska on Sunday, Nov. 1, in a 20-page order.
- The government lacked legal standing, and its ballot-segregation plan would threaten the secret ballot.
- The Justice Department plans to appeal; Alaska's separate state probe continues.
- Voting ends Tuesday, Nov. 3; ranked-choice tabulation is set for Nov. 18, certification for Nov. 25.
Downtown Anchorage, where U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason sits. The ruling came from her Anchorage courtroom. Photo: Quintin Soloviev / Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 4.0).
Two days before Election Day, the most unusual lawsuit of this midterm season just hit a wall. A federal judge didn't just rule against the Trump administration's attempt to block Alaska's Senate results — she ruled the government had no right to bring the case at all.
What happened
On Sunday, Nov. 1, U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason dismissed United States v. Alaska (No. 3:26-cv-00376). The Justice Department had filed the suit on Oct. 22, asking the court to stop Alaska from certifying its Senate race if Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan lost — until an investigation could sort out whether voters were confused by a second candidate on the ballot who shares his name.
That second candidate is Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., a retired teacher who isn't affiliated with any party. He, incumbent Dan Sullivan, Democrat Mary Peltola, and one other candidate are all on Alaska's ranked-choice ballot.
Latest verified facts
Gleason's 20-page order rests on three points. First, the federal government failed to establish the redressability requirement for Article III standing — in plain terms, it couldn't show the court could fix what it was complaining about. Second, the U.S. offered "no workable plan" to segregate ballots cast for Daniel J. Sullivan while still preserving voter secrecy. Third, such an order would likely violate Alaskan voters' right to a secret ballot — and changing the rules this close to an election is exactly what courts avoid.
The other side isn't done. Justice Department spokesperson Kiersten Pels told NPR the department plans to appeal, calling the dismissal procedural. Meanwhile, Alaska's Republican governor, Mike Dunleavy, is pressing ahead with his own state investigation and has indicated certification could depend on what it finds.
And the claim at the heart of the case needs careful handling: President Trump has said he ordered the lawsuit and claimed Peltola's campaign recruited the second Sullivan to confuse voters. That claim is unproven in any court, no one in the race has been charged, and Peltola has denied deliberately recruiting him. Read our earlier coverage: Alaska's own filing asking the judge to throw the case out, and the FBI's donor visits in the separate second-Sullivan probe.
Why it matters
Here's the thing: this was never just about one ballot line. The Senate majority could hinge on races like Alaska's, and the lawsuit tested whether the federal government can step in before a single ballot is
counted and hold up a state's certification. The ACLU, which intervened in support of Alaska, called it an effort to "throw out Alaska's election results before a single ballot was counted."
Downtown Anchorage on an April evening. The Senate race at the heart of the ruling will be decided by Alaska voters on Tuesday. Photo: Frank K. / Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 2.0).
Gleason's answer was blunt: elections are run by the states, and a federal court won't rewrite the rules on the eve of voting without standing and without a plan that keeps ballots secret.
Impact on the USA and the world
For Alaskans, the ruling clears the immediate threat of a federal freeze hanging over Tuesday's vote. For everyone else, it's a signal: last-minute federal challenges to state-run elections face a very steep climb, especially when they touch voter privacy.
But don't mistake a dismissal for the end of the fight. The appeal is coming, the governor's probe is still open, and the "second Dan Sullivan" question — how many voters, if any, mark the wrong Sullivan — is still unanswered. The ruling settles who decides for now. It doesn't settle the argument.
What happens next
Our take: the calendar now runs the story. Voting ends Tuesday, Nov. 3, with first-choice counts expected that night. Because Alaska votes by ranked choice, the full picture takes longer — tabulation is scheduled for Nov. 18, with certification targeted for Nov. 25. If you want the mechanics in plain English, see our Alaska ranked-choice explainer.
| Date | What happens |
|---|---|
| Tue, Nov. 3 | Voting ends; first-choice counts expected election night |
| Up to 15 days after | Absentee ballots still accepted |
| Wed, Nov. 18 | Ranked-choice tabulation scheduled |
| Wed, Nov. 25 | Certification targeted |
Two things to watch between now and then: the DOJ's appeal, and whatever Dunleavy's probe produces. Either one could reopen this fight before certification — but neither changes Tuesday's vote. The bottom line for voters is simple: the election goes ahead, and the count will take weeks, not hours.
Frequently asked questions
What did the judge decide? Judge Gleason dismissed the Justice Department's lawsuit, ruling the federal government lacked legal standing and that its ballot-segregation request would likely violate voters' right to a secret ballot.
Can the ruling be appealed? Yes. The Justice Department has said it plans to appeal the dismissal.
When will Alaska's winner be known? First-choice results come on Nov. 3, but the ranked-choice tabulation isn't scheduled until Nov. 18, with certification targeted for Nov. 25.
Sources: NPR, Nikkei (AP), CBS News, CNBC, Democracy Docket (Nov. 1, 2026). This is a developing story — updates to follow.