Alaska Prosecutor Investigates Democratic Ballot Plot

Two men named Dan Sullivan are on Alaska's ballot for U.S. Senate this year. One is the Republican incumbent. The other is a retired schoolteacher with no prior political experience, according to the Guardian. Federal prosecutors in Anchorage say they are now trying to determine whether that second candidacy was engineered to confuse voters, and by whom.

U.S. attorney Michael Heyman told reporters at a news conference in Anchorage on Friday that his office has opened both a criminal and a civil investigation into the matter. Heyman said the inquiry follows reporting by the New York Times that, in his words, alleged Democrats "orchestrated a sprawling conspiracy to recruit and prop up Daniel J Sullivan as a sham candidate," the Guardian reported. Both Dan Sullivans qualified for the ballot under Alaska's election rules, the Guardian reported.

What is the Justice Department investigating?

Heyman described a rapid buildup of federal resources in Alaska tied to the case. "This new information has resulted in a significant surge of law enforcement assets to Alaska," he said, according to the Guardian. "As we speak, law enforcement around the country are taking investigative steps with respect to a criminal investigation on these matters," Heyman added.

The department has not detailed what charges, if any, it is pursuing, and the Guardian's account does not specify a timeline for when investigators expect to reach conclusions. Heyman's remarks characterize the inquiry as active and expanding rather than complete, which leaves open how far the eventual findings will reach — into the Peltola campaign specifically, state or national party operatives, or some narrower set of individuals.

Who is the second Dan Sullivan on the ballot?

The Guardian identifies the second candidate only as Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired schoolteacher with no prior political experience who nonetheless met the qualifications to appear on the Senate ballot alongside the sitting Republican senator of the same first and last name. The newspaper does not report what Daniel J. Sullivan himself has said about his candidacy or who, if anyone, encouraged him to run.

What does the Peltola campaign say?

Mary Peltola, the Democratic Senate candidate, has denied knowledge of any scheme to recruit the second Sullivan, according to the Guardian's reporting. The Guardian's own framing of the story — "Mary Peltola denies knowledge as party accused of recruiting spoiler candidate" — underscores that the allegation against her campaign and national Democrats remains just that: an allegation cited by federal prosecutors from New York Times reporting, not a settled finding. Heyman's quoted description of a "sprawling conspiracy" is his characterization of what that reporting suggested, not an independent conclusion attributed to a court or a verified federal finding in the material reviewed.

What happens to the contested ballots?

Separate from the criminal inquiry, the Justice Department has gone to federal court seeking to preserve evidence. Assistant U.S. attorney E. Bryan Wilson filed a request asking a judge to order Alaska election officials to isolate ballots that rank Daniel J. Sullivan, so that investigators can examine "whether such ranking was the product of voter confusion, should such an investigation become necessary," Wilson wrote, as reported by the Guardian. The department also asked the judge for a preliminary injunction, according to the Guardian, though the newspaper's account does not specify every term requested.

That filing effectively pauses the normal handling of some ballots in Alaska's ranked-choice Senate count while the segregation request is litigated, though the Guardian's reporting does not say how many ballots are affected or when a ruling is expected.

What to watch next

• Whether the federal judge grants the Justice Department's request to segregate and preserve ballots ranking Daniel J. Sullivan.
• Whether prosecutors identify specific individuals, inside or outside the Peltola campaign, as targets of the criminal investigation.
• Whether the New York Times reporting cited by Heyman is corroborated, disputed, or expanded by additional documentation.
• Whether Mary Peltola's campaign issues further comment beyond its denial of knowledge, as more details from the investigation become public.

The Guardian's reporting, compiled with wire services, remains the fullest public account of the prosecutor's statements and the court filings as of Friday; no additional on-record statements from Daniel J. Sullivan or from national Democratic Party officials appear in that account.