Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan’s name challenger was allowed on the primary vote

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (CN) – How many Dan Sullivans is too many? The Alaska Supreme Court does not see a problem with two on the same primary ballot.

The Alaska Division of Elections, as well as the state Republican Party, sought to bar Dan J. Sullivan from running against incumbent U.S. Senator Dan S. Sullivan, but the Alaska Supreme Court ruled on Monday that challenger Sullivan is eligible to run.

“This case is remanded to the Division of Elections to determine, in the first instance, how respondent Sullivan will be ranked as a candidate within the limits of Alaska’s existing ballot design law,” the Supreme Court wrote in a brief order. The full opinion will be available in the near future, Chief Justice Susan Carney said.

The court expedited the case to give the electoral division enough time to prepare for the upcoming August primary.

The elections division had disqualified challenger Sullivan on “good faith” grounds, her lead lawyer Christopher Murray told the High Court on Monday.

Murray argued that Dan J. Sullivan had no serious intention of becoming a U.S. senator and said the election division’s choice to disqualify the challenger was intended to “protect the right to vote” from a campaign “designed to frustrate.”

“The public’s ability to choose for themselves will be impaired,” Murray said.

The senator and other Republicans have accused Dan J. Sullivan of running only as part of a Democratic plot to sow confusion and tip the scales in favor of former Democratic U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola, the senator’s main rival for the contested seat — one that could help Democrats regain the majority.

With Alaska’s ranked primary, the four candidates with the most votes will advance to the November general election, regardless of party affiliation.

In a statement in early June, Carmela Warfield, chairwoman of the Alaska Republican Party, called for an investigation into the younger Sullivan. She claimed that when he registered, his party was undeclared and he had no affiliation with the Alaska Republican Party.

But on Monday, Sullivan’s opponent’s lawyer, Jeffrey Robinson, cited the qualifications clause of the US Constitution, which sets out three attributes necessary for a member of Congress: a minimum age, US citizenship and legal residency.

Nowhere, Robinson noted, does a “bona fide” candidacy qualification exist.

Judge Aimee Oravec seemed to agree.

“Where is the legal authority to declare a candidate’s intent? People run for office for different reasons,” she said. “There is no limiting principle.”

Anchorage Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews had previously ruled in favor of Dan J. Sullivan after the candidate appealed the election division’s move to remove him from the race.

In a statement, challenger Sullivan said, “My team and I are grateful for the Alaska Supreme Court’s careful and timely attention to this important expedited case and its decision to affirm Judge Matthews’ well-reasoned and thorough order vacating the Division’s illegal decision to disqualify me as a candidate. We expect the Alaska Division to act in full compliance with the law.” Ball’s existing ballots.”

The senator’s campaign did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

In an ironic twist that Republicans seem to have ignored, the incumbent senator, who hails from Ohio originally, wasn’t the first Republican Dan Sullivan in recent Alaska politics.

Dan A. Sullivan was mayor of Anchorage from 2009 to 2015 and served on the Anchorage Assembly — the borough’s city council — for nine years before that.

That Dan Sullivan also ran for senator in 2016 before dropping out “mysterious” circumstances.. Had he stayed in the race and defeated incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski, he could have gone to Congress with Dan S. Sullivan, giving Alaska a Sullivan Senate delegation.