Federal judge rejects Trump lawsuit against certification in Alaska, and 'Dan Sullivan' case turns into political dispute

A federal judge in Alaska has rejected the Donald Trump administration's lawsuit seeking to block the certification of the state's Senate race. The dispute has two candidates named Dan Sullivan on the ballot: the Republican senator who is seeking re-election and a second name, nicknamed "decoy Dan". The case was discussed on the Fox Business program "Outnumbered".

According to the program, the presence of two candidates with the same name divides the vote and could, ultimately, hand victory to Democrat Mary Peltola, a former federal deputy who is running against "the two Dans". Trump classified the episode as electoral fraud "at the highest level" and as a Democratic "frame".

What the report says and what Peltola denies

The program cited a New York Times report that Peltola was aware of the effort to put the second Dan Sullivan on the ballot. She denies any involvement and says she is offended by the accusations. One of the presenters stated that the report would have multiple sources and that the newspaper would have access to more information than was already published.

According to commentators, organizers sought out about a dozen people named Dan Sullivan across the state in an attempt to convince one of them to run. The man named as the central figure, who allegedly received US$87,000 for a company he co-founded, used pseudonyms and looked for candidates with the same initials as the senator. Guests on the program said that this money is the trail that investigators can follow.

Senator Dan Sullivan, in an interview cited by the program, stated that the opponent talks about corruption in Washington while trying to manipulate the system in Alaska. Peltola, in turn, denies involvement.

Legal issue and caution from the Department of Justice

One of the guests recalled that federal law provides for a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years for anyone who conspires to harm, oppress, threaten or intimidate someone in the free exercise of a right guaranteed by the Constitution or laws. In his assessment, the central question is not whether someone was actually deceived, but whether there was a conspiracy to deceive. He also said that it would be relevant to see whether reporting sources would be called to testify if there was a grand jury.

Presenter Kayleigh McEnany noted that the Department of Justice has been cautious and has not "jumped too early," saying it wants to investigate the case. A member of the organization, heard by her the previous day, stated that investigations were already underway and that the New York Times' accusations were shocking. Commentators also mentioned a case in Florida years ago in which Republicans acted similarly and someone was arrested, noting that that case was local and did not involve a Senate vacancy.

A Wall Street Journal op-ed, cited in the program, argues that the race could and perhaps should face a legal challenge. According to the text, it is possible that the result will be clear enough to dispense with litigation, but, if control of the Senate depends on Alaska, the candidacy of "bait Dan" could not be maintained.

What to watch out for

In the presenters' opinion, the episode is a political problem for the Democrat, especially among undecided voters, who do not like to feel deceived. One of them called the situation "political dynamite" and said there may not be a definitive answer before Tuesday, but that questions are already weighing on the dispute.

The transcript does not contain market projections. For the investor, the point to follow is that the result in Alaska could influence the balance of forces in the Senate, a variable that is usually observed in debates about fiscal policy, taxes and regulation. So far, what exists are court decisions, a report and ongoing investigations, without conclusion.

Automatically translated from Portuguese.