On June 15th, the Alaska Division of Elections removed retired teacher Dan J. Sullivan, who hails from Petersburg, from the General Election ballot, concluding that his desire to run for the U.S. Senate seat currently occupied by Senator Dan S. Sullivan “was not filed in good faith” and was motivated by an intention to confuse voters. Dan J. Sullivan denied those allegations – but argued that regardless of his intent he is entitled to be on the ballot.

Superior Court Judge Matthews heard the case and ruled that Dan J. Sullivan met every requirement the law requires to run for a U.S. Senate seat and held that the Alaska Division of Elections violated the law by removing Mr. Sullivan based on subjective factors that are not found anywhere in the law. The judge concluded that the Division lacked the authority to add any additional requirement that a candidate must meet, and that the state statute “does not authorize the removal of a candidate who satisfies the legal qualifications for office.” Accordingly, Judge Matthews ordered the Division to put Dan J. Sullivan back on the ballot. On appeal, the Alaska Supreme Court unanimously affirmed Judge Matthews’ ruling (Justice Borghesan did not participate in this vote.)

The judicial opinions resulting from the litigation between retired teacher Dan J. Sullivan and the State’s Division of Elections underscores exactly why the independence of Alaska’s state judges benefits all Alaskans. Both the Superior Court and the Alaska Supreme Court concluded that the Division based its decision on allegations made by partisan actors calling upon it to apply subjective criteria not authorized by law. The courts flatly rejected the request to defer to the Division’s “expertise in election law” and instead demonstrated the judges’ allegiance to the plain meaning of the United States Constitution.

This case illustrates why judicial independence should be important to every Alaskan. Judicial independence assures Alaskans that the state’s judges are neutral decision-makers who apply clear rules to everyone who appears in court. The same rules are applied to people who appear in court no matter who they are, who they hang out with, how much money they have, where they live, what they look like, or what they believe.

Thank you,
– Alaskans for Fair Courts