A superior court judge in Alaska denied Democrat Mary Peltola’s Senate campaign access to records containing information about rejected absentee ballots, saying the request is “not reasonable” given the time crunch election officials face in counting votes from last week’s election.
State Judge Thomas Matthews’ ruling is the latest development in the legal battles surrounding Alaska’s pending U.S. Senate race, with Peltola currently maintaining a narrow lead over incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan.
Matthews’ decision — made a day after he heard arguments in the case — is a loss for the Peltola campaign in what’s already been a tumultuous and drawn-out certification process.
The Peltola campaign initially sued Alaska Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom and Alaska Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher on Nov. 5 after they refused to provide the requested absentee records.
Trending
This lawsuit is one of several legal challenges surrounding the Alaska Senate race. Other court battles have concerned the appearance of a second Republican candidate also named Dan Sullivan on the ballot. President Donald Trump and other Republicans had accused the Peltola campaign of working with the second Dan Sullivan — who appeared on the ballot as Daniel J. Sullivan — to siphon votes away from the incumbent senator.
Days before the election, a report from The New York Times appeared to confirm that Peltola’s political operation had indeed been in touch with the second Dan Sullivan — though Peltola has strongly denied any direct involvement in his campaign.
“All votes going to the Fake Dan Sullivan, which was done solely for the purpose of fraud and confusion, should immediately be given to the Real Dan Sullivan (Senator!),” Trump wrote Tuesday on Truth Social, calling the election “rigged.”
In a hearing Tuesday, Matthews appeared to be swayed by the Peltola campaign’s efforts to pare down its initial request to local election officials.
The records in question often contain personal information such as voters’ addresses, but on Tuesday the campaign confirmed that they only wanted a list containing voters’ names and their corresponding absentee ballot accept or reject codes. They also insisted that the campaign “will not contact a single voter” without first contacting the Alaska Division of Elections.
“I see this as a bit narrower than what I thought it was when I walked in here today,” Matthews said at the end of the hearing.
Matthews had called on both parties to try and work through the issue over the weekend, and lawyers for Peltola’s campaign said they were happy to “narrow” their request after having conversations with state officials about what is feasible.
Margaret Paton-Walsh, the lawyer representing Alaska in the proceedings, argued against the campaign’s request on Tuesday by saying that it would be “labor intensive” for election officials to redact voters’ addresses and other personal information.
Paton-Walsh also questioned why the campaign should have access to these records before the Nov. 25 certification deadline, when the voters themselves do not have access to their own records until well after that date. Certification is the “starting point not the ending point” for most legal challenges to elections, Paton-Walsh said.
Author
