Judge Denies Peltola Campaign’s Request for Alaska Absentee Ballot Data
Judge Denies Peltola Campaign’s Request for Alaska Absentee Ballot Data
An Anchorage Superior Court judge on Wednesday denied a lawsuit filed by the campaign of Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mary Peltola, which sought detailed data on rejected absentee ballots from the Alaska Division of Elections. The ruling halts the campaign’s attempt to identify voters whose ballots were invalidated and understand the specific reasons for those rejections while the state continues its critical vote-counting operations.
ANCHORAGE, Alaska — An Anchorage Superior Court judge on Wednesday rejected a request by the campaign of Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mary Peltola to receive detailed absentee ballot data from the state, effectively blocking efforts to identify voters who cast rejected ballots and determine the specific reasons for those rejections.
The ruling by Judge Thomas Matthews comes as the Alaska Division of Elections continues to tally votes in one of the nation’s most closely watched Senate races. Peltola holds a narrow lead over incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan in first-choice votes following the Nov. 3 general election, but a final winner may not be determined until Nov. 18, the deadline for ballots to arrive and for ranked-choice voting tabulation to conclude.
Peltola’s campaign filed the lawsuit against the state on Friday, arguing that it needed the records by Nov. 25, when the election is scheduled to be certified. The campaign stated its goal was to ensure that lawful votes were properly counted. However, during oral arguments earlier in the week, an attorney for the Peltola campaign clarified that there was no allegation of irregularities in the process of accepting or rejecting absentee ballots.
Judge Matthews sided with the state, ruling that the Alaska Public Records Act does not compel the Division of Elections to generate the specific report sought by the campaign. He emphasized the timing of the request as a primary factor, noting that the division is currently in the midst of active vote counting with strict deadlines to meet.
Matthews observed that the Peltola campaign first requested the records on Oct. 27, a date when the division had already established its review processes and ballots were actively being cast. The judge wrote that providing the information would require the state to procure new software from a vendor to redact voters’ addresses while retaining their names and rejection reasons. This process would rely on the state’s outdated voter registration database, known as VREMS.
“The statute does not require the division to prepare a specific report for the campaign, even if the information the report would otherwise provide is public information,” Matthews wrote. He further noted that while public agencies may provide electronic services involving public records, such services “may not take priority over the primary responsibilities of a public agency.”
“This point is critical,” the judge added. “The division is actively in the middle of counting ballots. It has active deadlines it must meet. The division asserts its staff is actively working long hours to accomplish its fundamental responsibility — administering elections. The timing of the campaign’s request could simply not be worse.”
In his ruling, Matthews granted the state’s motion to reject any requirement that the division create a new report for the campaign during ballot counting.
The Department of Law issued a statement Wednesday evening supporting the decision, quoting the judge’s assessment of the timing. “The Division remains committed to its mission of ensuring Alaska’s elections are administered fairly, accurately, and in accordance with the law,” said Sam Curtis, a spokesperson for the department.
The Sullivan campaign had intervened in the case, arguing that it shared an interest in an accurate count but opposed the Peltola campaign’s request. The Sullivan filing asserted that the data was sought to influence election officials’ decisions on whether to count ballots outside of the state’s legal review process, which could place the incumbent in an unfair position.
Absentee ballots in Alaska are typically rejected for reasons such as late postmarks or missing signatures. The state does not have a ballot curing process that allows voters to correct minor mistakes, meaning invalid ballots are not counted. In the 2024 general election, the division rejected approximately 1,300 ballots, citing improper or insufficient witnessing for many of them.
The context of absentee voting in this race has been particularly contentious in rural areas. During the primary election earlier this year, the absentee ballot disqualification rate was higher in some parts of rural Alaska than the state average. Additionally, dozens of absentee ballots cast in person before the August primary failed to reach the Division of Elections in time to be counted.
In-person absentee voting was offered in the days leading up to the Nov. 3 election in many rural communities where voters were expected to favor Peltola, who is Yup’ik from Western Alaska. State attorneys had argued in court that the elections division has never provided information in the manner requested by the Peltola campaign and that no law requires it to do so.
The outcome of the Alaska Senate contest will be the last to be decided in the United States. The race concludes following a broader national shift in which Democrats regained control of both the U.S. House and Senate, driven by voter frustration over policies associated with Republican President Donald Trump, including the Iran war.
Q.Arango--BT
