U.S. Politics · Elections · 29 outlets (L 7 · C 10 · R 9 · 3 not rated)

Judge dismisses Trump administration lawsuit over Alaska Senate race

A federal judge on Sunday dismissed a Justice Department lawsuit that sought to block certification of Alaska's U.S. Senate race if Republican incumbent Sen. Dan Sullivan loses.^{⁠[3, 18, 29]} The suit, filed at President Trump's direction less than two weeks before the election, concerned a second candidate named Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired teacher, appearing on the ballot.^{⁠[8, 33, 35]} Alaska's Republican-run state government had urged dismissal, saying setting aside ballots was 'not even possible' without violating voter privacy.^{⁠[22, 33]}

Sullivan told CNN's 'State of the Union' he would accept the election results whether he wins or loses.^{⁠[7, 10]} Sullivan also accused Peltola of lying about her campaign's involvement in recruiting the second Dan Sullivan, saying 'She got caught lying, and she's still lying.'^{⁠[13, 17, 21]} A recent New York Times investigation reported that aides from Peltola's campaign were involved in the effort; Peltola has denied any knowledge of it.^{⁠[7, 13]}

Why it matters The dismissal halts the Justice Department's push for discovery into an alleged Democratic-backed spoiler campaign, according to the Washington Examiner.^⁠[31]

Covered by The New York Times, NBC News, New York Post and 26 more

Read first ‘She’s Still Lying!’ GOP Senator Dan Sullivan Hammers Dem Opponent Over the Reported Plot to Put Another Dan Sullivan on the Ballot · Mediaite

Where accounts differ (1)

FramingBreitbart presents Sullivan directly accusing Peltola of a 'ballot-stacking' plot ('Dem Opponent Peltola Is Lying About Ballot-Stacking'), while CBS frames it as an unproven argument by the Justice Department ('Daniel J. Sullivan's name on the ballot potentially diverted voters').^{⁠[11, 21]}
- Breitbart · Right · Nov 1, 11:22 a.m. ET Sen. Sullivan: Dem Opponent Peltola Is 'Lying' About Ballot-StackingSunday on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) said his opponent for U.S. Sentate, Rep. Mary Peltola (D-AK), is lying by denying any knowledge about the ballot-stacking plot to recruit another man named…
- CBS News · Center · Nov 1, 1:39 p.m. ET Judge tosses lawsuit seeking to delay certification of Alaska Senate raceThe Justice Department argued that Daniel J. Sullivan's name on the ballot potentially diverted voters, and the Democrat running in the race would benefit as a result.

How balanced is this coverage?

Of the 26 rated outlets that covered it, 7 are left of center, 10 are center and 9 are right of center (7 of them in the Right group). 3 more are not rated.

Where the outlets sit

Left: none.
Leans left: HuffPost (−1.06), Raw Story (−0.94), MS NOW (−0.76), The New York Times (−0.70), The Guardian (−0.70), NPR (−0.68), The Daily Beast (−0.64).
Center: NBC News (−0.49), PBS NewsHour (−0.48), Newsweek (−0.30), CBS News (−0.14), Mediaite (+0.04), Yahoo News (+0.07), Bloomberg (+0.08), The Hill (+0.10), UPI (+0.17), CNBC (+0.40).
Leans right: New York Post (+0.64), Reason (+0.94).
Right: The Washington Times (+1.27), Washington Examiner (+1.34), RedState (+1.87), Breitbart (+2.03), The Daily Wire (+2.07), The Daily Signal (+2.20), One America News Network (+2.69).

Not rated Al Jazeera, Los Angeles Times, NewsNation. Not placed: they have no lean score.

Each dot is an outlet that covered it, placed by its audience-lean score (Eady et al. 2025), which measures who shares its links, not how accurate it is. The ticks under the line are all 113 rated outlets Tare reads.

Read across the spectrum

Left-leaning Republican senator Dan Sullivan says he will accept Alaska election results · The Guardian
Center ‘She’s Still Lying!’ GOP Senator Dan Sullivan Hammers Dem Opponent Over the Reported Plot to Put Another Dan Sullivan on the Ballot · Mediaite
Right-leaning Trump ask to set aside ‘Decoy Dan’ Alaska Senate ballots ‘not even possible’: attorneys · New York Post

Detailed briefing

What happened

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 on Friday to deny the Justice Department’s emergency request for an injunction that would have required California officials to segregate or not count mail ballots linked to a department list of about 20,000 people the government said might not be citizens. The majority said there was no feasible way to identify those ballots without risking disenfranchisement of eligible voters and disruption of tabulation. An earlier district-court denial of the same request stood. Hours later, U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson issued a temporary restraining order barring the Justice Department and Homeland Security from threatening, intimidating, or coercing state and local election officials, and from demanding that they segregate or stop counting ballots the government deems disputed. The order, which expires Nov. 16, found the government’s actions likely violated the Voting Rights Act. The lawsuit was brought by unions SEIU and AFSCME and civil rights groups. Separately, the department issued criminal grand jury subpoenas to at least four Los Angeles-area election workers seeking records related to alleged noncitizen voti^{⁠[14, 24]}

Background

Federal law bars noncitizens from voting in federal elections. The department compiled a list by matching voter rolls with immigration data and asked California to verify citizenship or set the associated mail ballots aside before they were mixed and could no longer be traced. California officials and researchers cited by some outlets said the list was unreliable, with many names not matching voter rolls or corresponding to citizens. Millions of Californians had already voted by mail; officials said processed ballots cannot be matched back to individual voters. The department said enforcing the ban on noncitizen voting is its job. Judge Thompson also cited earlier department letters to officials in all 50 states warning of possible prosecution for failing to preserve records.^{⁠[14, 24]}

How the coverage differs

Left-leaning outlets such as The Guardian and Raw Story framed the rulings as blocking intimidation of election workers and an unconstitutional federal takeover of state elections, highlighting unions as plaintiffs and researchers’ criticism of the list. Center outlets including CBS News emphasized the judge’s finding of likely Voting Rights Act violations and the order’s nationwide-style limits on threats and ballot-segregation demands. Right-leaning outlets such as the Washington Examiner and Fox News stressed the 2-1 split (a Trump appointee in the majority), the dissent arguing segregation would not cancel votes, a possible Supreme Court appeal days before the midterms, and the criminal subpoenas as part of an integrity probe, while noting California disputes the list.^{⁠[14, 24]}

What's still unclear

Whether the department will seek emergency Supreme Court review before Tuesday’s election remains open. The reliability of the 20,000-name list is disputed, as is whether any of those ballots can still be identified. The scope of the grand-jury investigation and whether subpoenaed workers are targets is not public. How Thompson’s order interacts with ongoing criminal process, and whether similar demands in other states will be affected, is unresolved.^⁠[24]

Written by Grok from the full articles, at a reader's request. AI can get details wrong; check the sources.

Sources

Report an error