L'amministrazione Trump fa causa per bloccare una possibile vittoria democratica nella corsa per il Senato dell'Alaska

The United States Department of Justice filed a federal lawsuit on Thursday seeking to prevent Alaska from certifying the results of its upcoming U.S. Senate election, specifically if incumbent Republican Senator Dan S. Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. The suit, lodged in federal court in Anchorage, argues that the presence of a second candidate named Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. on the ballot creates a risk of voter confusion that could invalidate the outcome. President Donald Trump stated on Friday that he personally ordered the Justice Department to file the complaint, describing the rival candidacy as a disgrace and a scam. This legal maneuver marks a pre-emptive effort by the administration to challenge election results before the November 3 vote takes place, signaling a broader strategy to contest midterms outcomes that favor the opposition. The core of the dispute centers on two Republican candidates sharing nearly identical names. Senator Dan S. Sullivan is the incumbent seeking re-election. His challenger, Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., is a retired elementary school teacher and former U.S. Forest Service worker who registered as a Republican earlier this year. Although he initially ran as a Republican, he will appear on the ballot without a party designation to distinguish him from the senator. The Justice Department contends that Sullivan Jr. filed his candidacy on May 29 with the specific intention of misleading supporters of the senator into voting for him, thereby siphoning votes away from the incumbent to benefit Peltola’s campaign. The filing asserts that the sole purpose of this candidacy is to reduce the vote total for Senator Sullivan. In the lawsuit, Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward Jr. requested that a judge block the certification of any election result that may be impacted by voter confusion. The administration proposed a specific condition for blocking certification: if Senator Sullivan does not win, but would have won had all votes cast for Daniel J. Sullivan been counted for the senator, the state should be barred from declaring a winner. The Justice Department argued that an investigation would be necessary to determine whether votes intended for the senator were mistakenly cast for the challenger. The suit names state and local election officials as defendants, claiming that Alaska would fail its obligation to protect the integrity of its elections if it included results tainted by the inclusion of the second Sullivan. President Trump addressed the controversy while traveling to a campaign rally in Florida on Friday. He told reporters, "I'm the one that said do it," confirming that the directive originated from his office. In a separate post on Truth Social earlier in the week, Trump expressed deep concern about the race, noting that even a small percentage of diverted votes could change the outcome. He characterized the situation as totally confusing and indicated his administration was exploring powerful legal options to end the rival candidacy. A Justice Department spokesperson stated that the agency is taking necessary steps to ensure that what they call a frivolous candidacy does not undermine the integrity of Alaska’s election or the will of its voters. Critics have widely dismissed the legal merits of the suit. Senator Lisa Murkowski, Alaska’s other U.S. senator and a Republican, stated that the Justice Department should never have filed the lawsuit. Legal experts described the action as having no merit and seeking relief not allowed under federal law. Derek Muller, a law professor at Notre Dame University, wrote that the legal argument is among the worst he has seen and that the suit is designed to win a press release rather than the litigation itself. David Becker of the Center for Election Innovation and Research noted that the administration has no authority to dictate when or how Alaska certifies its Senate election results, pointing out that the issue had already been fully litigated by Alaska’s courts. Voting rights experts labeled the filing a garbage lawsuit and an unprecedented federal intervention. Daniel J. Sullivan has consistently denied allegations that his goal is to cause confusion or divert votes. In interviews, he stated that he entered the race because he was unimpressed with the current senator’s leadership and believed his shared name would provide an instant megaphone for his message. Previous efforts to remove him from the ballot were rejected by the Alaska Supreme Court in June, which permitted him to remain on the ballot despite the name similarity. The race is considered tight, with polls suggesting Peltola holds a narrow lead in the final days before the election. Alaska has historically leaned Republican, with Trump winning the state by 13 points in 2024, and the state has not elected a Democratic governor since 2002. The lawsuit fits into a pattern of aggressive election oversight by the Trump administration. Officials have pressed states for voter registration data and argued for stricter measures to ensure public confidence in the vote. Critics, including Democratic and some Republican election officials, view these moves as federal overreach. At least 34 federal district court decisions have temporarily halted or permanently blocked administration efforts to interfere in elections since the start of the president’s second term, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. These rulings include decisions by judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents. Reactions from political figures have been sharp. Mary Peltola, the Democratic nominee, criticized the move on social media, stating that it represents the corruption Alaskans are fed up with and accusing the senator of using allies in Washington to stay in power. Her campaign and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee have asked to join the case as defendants, arguing that Alaskans must be allowed to elect their representatives freely. Meanwhile, the Alaska Division of Elections said it is reviewing the complaint while remaining focused on running the ongoing election and ensuring voter confidence. The department emphasized its commitment to assisting voters and avoiding confusion through official pamphlets and poll worker assistance. Attorney General Todd Blanche told reporters on Thursday that it is not the Justice Department’s intention to improperly interfere with elections or state confirmation processes. However, the filing itself suggests otherwise by explicitly targeting a specific adverse outcome. The administration’s approach contrasts with traditional norms of federal non-interference in state election certification. As the November 3 midterm elections approach, where control of the U.S. Congress is at stake, this lawsuit sets a precedent for how the administration may handle other close races. Election officials nationwide have reported preparations for potential federal interference, including legal challenges and disputes over voting procedures that could disrupt the certification of results in multiple states. The outcome of the Alaska suit will likely hinge on whether federal courts grant the extraordinary relief sought by the Justice Department to alter state-level election certifications based on alleged voter confusion.