Alaska Court Hears Dan J. Sullivan Ballot Access Case on Thursday, June 25

An Alaska Superior Court will hear Sullivan v State of Alaska Division of Elections, 3AN-26-07485C1 on Thursday, June 25, at 10 a.m. Alaska time. The state says the judge will need to make a decision by Tuesday, June 30, because primary ballots must be printed in early July.


Comments

Alaska Court Hears Dan J. Sullivan Ballot Access Case on Thursday, June 25 — 6 Comments

  1. This is an article about the hearing which was live-streamed with 300+ viewers, including the Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General.

    https://www.juneauindependent.com/post/how-to-watch-dan-j-sullivan-s-court-appeal-on-his-us-senate-candidacy-thursday

    The judge indicated that he would probably issue his ruling on Friday, but it might come after regular court hours. He told the attorneys to go home and get some rest since they will be having to appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court this weekend.

  2. WHEN DID OLDE SIBERIAN FOLKS INVADE AK LAND ???

    NOOO FLAGS BACK THEN — JUST A PILE OF ROCKS FOR CLAIM ???

  3. An audio recording of the hearing is available at https://courts.alaska.gov/index.htm

    The case is legally an appeal of an administrative decision (by the Alaska Division of Elections). In that sense it is similar to a potential appeal of the decision of the SOS in New Jersey to put a Libertarian Candidate who had used out-of-state circulators back on the ballot. In the New Jersey case, an “Administrative Law Judge” had made an “initial decision” removing the candidate from the ballot. The Secretary of State had then modified that decision, effectively reversing it. The fact that in New Jersey that one of the the decision-makers had the title of “judge” did not make it a judicial decision.

    The judge disallowed an attempt by the Alaska Republican Party to intervene, but did say he would treat their brief as an amicus brief. He also accepted an amicus brief from Dustin Darden, who is also a candidate for US Senate. Darden apparently clicked in by zoom and started presenting his case. Darden either spells his first name with an umlaut over the ‘u’, or uses a happy face in his signature. One of Dan S. Sullivan’s first jobs as an attorney was to clerk for longtime (32 years) Alaska Supreme Court justice Warren Matthews. The judge hearing the current case is Thomas Matthews, apparently no relation to Warren Matthews. Among the cases cited were ‘Kohlhaas v. Alaska’ in which a number of individuals tried to derail the Top 4 Open Primary reform, arguing that voters would be confused. The Alaska Supreme Court rejected these aspersions on Alaska voters. Scott Kohlhaas is a candidate in the US Senate election. Also cited was the case of Eric Hafner who was (and is) incarcerated in a federal prison in New York, but was running for Congress from Alaska. Democrats argued that it was impossible for Hafner to be an inhabitant of Alaska on election day. The Division of Elections had determined in that case that it was impossible to know (e.g., Hafner might be paroled or transferred to a prison in Alaska). Hafner is once again running for Congress from Alaska, and his mother Carol Hafner is running for US Senator. She has never been to Alaska, but she claims to have flown over it (unknown whether she could see Russia from the plane). Richard Mayers from Chicago is running for US Senator. He was disqualified in Illinois and Indiana, apparently because of his offensive nickname. In Alaska he is apparently only running as a Republican.

    Dan J. Sullivan’s case was straightforward relying on the Qualifications Clause of the US Constitution, a citing decisions such as US Term Limits.

    The Division of Elections claimed that Beecher’s decision was not based on qualifications, but on deficiencies in Sullivan’s application. They said they were concerned that voters who intended to vote for Dan S. Sullivan might be confused and vote for Dan J. Sullivan. Since Dan J. refused to answer their interrogatories under oath he was clearly attempting to confuse voters. This would be unfair to voters. If this argument does not make sense, try putting a paper bag over your head and stand on your head while reading it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.