What We Know About Marc Elias's Role in Alaska's Senate Race

Alaska voters this fall will see two men named Dan Sullivan on a Senate ballot — the Republican incumbent, and a second candidate who entered the state's nonpartisan primary with no prior political career. According to an Oct. 30 New York Post editorial, that second Sullivan was recruited with help from an attorney at Elias Law Group, the firm run by Democratic lawyer Marc Elias, which also served as counsel to Democratic challenger Mary Peltola's campaign and to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

Who is the second Dan Sullivan on the ballot?

The Post, citing New York Times reporting, describes him as a retired U.S. Forest Service employee with no previous political involvement or apparent interest in office before entering the race. He is registered as a Republican, the editorial says, but was "assisted and funded every step of the way" by Democratic operatives and donors largely tied to the Elias network, according to the Post.

What role did Marc Elias and his firm play?

Elias Law Group was counsel to both the Peltola campaign and the DSCC, the Post reports. The editorial states that at least one attorney from the firm was central to recruiting the second Sullivan into the primary. Elias is a longtime Democratic campaign lawyer whose past work includes hiring the research firm Fusion GPS during Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign, representing Black Lives Motor's nonprofit arm, and pushing litigation and legislation on campaign-finance rules, per the Post.

Why would a second Sullivan help Mary Peltola?

Alaska uses ranked-choice voting in its general election after a nonpartisan primary sends the top four finishers forward. The Post's editorial argues that splitting the Republican vote between two candidates sharing the Sullivan name could siphon support from the incumbent and improve Peltola's odds once ballots are ranked. The editorial does not cite internal campaign strategy documents to support the motive; it draws the inference from the recruitment effort it describes.

Is this illegal, and has anyone been charged?

No charges are described in the source material. The Post's editorial board writes that the arrangement "may well be a federal crime, as a conspiracy to deceive and injure the public's exercise of constitutional voting rights," but that is the editorial board's characterization, not a filed complaint or court finding. No law-enforcement agency or election authority is cited in the piece as having opened an inquiry.

What have the campaigns said?

The Post's editorial does not include a response from the Peltola campaign, Elias Law Group, or the second Dan Sullivan. The piece notes that Peltola has campaigned as an outsider candidate even as her campaign worked with Elias's firm, which it calls "the ultimate Democratic political operative." None of the parties named are quoted disputing the Times reporting the editorial relies on.

What happens next depends on whether news organizations or Alaska election officials examine the recruitment of the second Sullivan candidate before ballots are finalized. The Post's account is an opinion-page analysis built on reporting it attributes to the New York Times; readers looking for the underlying reporting should check that coverage directly, since this piece does not reproduce it.