2026-06-27T12:46:40.580Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
阿拉斯加州朱诺 美联社电—
一名与阿拉斯加联邦参议员丹·沙利文同名且同为共和党籍的男子，有权在8月的初选中挑战这位现任参议员，一名法官于周五作出这一裁决，这是围绕美国参议院控制权整体斗争的最新波折。
阿拉斯加州高等法院法官托马斯·马修斯的裁决推翻了阿拉斯加州选举局局长卡罗尔·比彻6月15日作出的取消这位挑战者参选资格、将其排除在初选选票之外的决定。马修斯的裁决可向州最高法院提起上诉。
阿拉斯加州州政府律师表示，最终裁决的截止日期为周二，以便能按时印刷8月18日初选的选票。
法官裁定，选举局以候选人的参选并非“出于善意”为由将丹·J·沙利文排除在外，这一决定并未依据美国宪法、阿拉斯加州法律或选举局自身的规定。
“相反，该决定基于一项全新的、此前从未明确过的‘善意’标准，”法官写道。
这位来自渔业小镇彼得斯堡的退休教师于5月登记参选，挑战现任参议员。
阿拉斯加州州政府律师并未立即回应针对周五裁决的置评请求。丹·J·沙利文的律师杰弗里·罗伯逊在一封电子邮件中表示，他预计选举局会对该裁决提起上诉，在阿拉斯加州最高法院就此案作出裁决之前，他无法发表评论。
两位丹·沙利文之间的争议凸显了现任参议员连任竞选的利害关系。阿拉斯加的参议院席位争夺战是今年秋季预计竞争激烈的约六个参议院席位之一，也是民主党人试图夺回参议院多数席位目标之一的竞选。
现任参议员及其盟友，包括全国共和党参议员竞选委员会，都谴责挑战者参选的行为，称其参选可能会误导选民。根据阿拉斯加的选举制度，初选排名前四的候选人，无论党派归属，都将进入11月的排名选择大选。
这位现任参议员指责挑战者沙利文与民主党以及民主党前联邦众议员玛丽·佩尔托拉的竞选团队勾结——佩尔托拉被视为现任参议员的主要对手——以此制造混乱，提升佩尔托拉的胜选机会。佩尔托拉的竞选团队和阿拉斯加州民主党均否认这一指控，挑战者本人也予以否认。
参议员沙利文和佩尔托拉是这场拥挤选战中知名度最高的两位候选人，也是仅有的两位披露筹款数据的候选人。
选举局局长比彻曾表示，她认定挑战者沙利文不符合参选资格，原因是其参选并非出于善意，而是旨在误导选民。她称，挑战者登记投票时使用的名字是小丹尼尔·J·沙利文，并在参选同时将党派身份更改为共和党。她还提到，挑战者的竞选网站与现任参议员的网站存在相似之处，且其聘请的顾问曾为部分民主党客户服务。她并未提及发现所谓勾结的证据。
在主张维持挑战者参选资格被取消的决定时，阿拉斯加州州政府律师驳斥了“可通过选票设计减少两名同名同党候选人参选引发的选民困惑”的提议。
“宪法并未要求各州将一名虚假候选人列入选票，再通过设计选择来弥补其造成的损害，”阿拉斯加州司法部律师雷切尔·威蒂以及外部律师克里斯托弗·默里和迈克尔·弗朗西斯科在法庭文件中写道。
挑战者沙利文的律师辩称，美国宪法对参议员资格仅规定了三项排他性条件，仅涉及年龄、公民身份和居住年限。他们表示，比彻没有法律权力将他们的委托人排除在选票之外。
挑战者沙利文曾表示，与现任参议员同名且同属一党给他带来了“即时的宣传声势”。但这位69岁的退休教师、前美国林务局雇员表示，他考虑参选已有一段时间，并对现任参议员感到不满。
他最初在州候选人名单上被登记为丹·J·沙利文，而现任参议员则被登记为丹·S·沙利文，并被标注为现任候选人。
Man with same name as US Sen. Dan Sullivan is eligible for Alaska’s primary ballot, judge rules
2026-06-27T12:46:40.580Z / CNN
JUNEAU, Alaska AP—
A man with the same name and Republican party affiliation as Alaska US Sen. Dan Sullivan is eligible to challenge the senator in the August primary, a judge ruled Friday, the latest turn in a drama surrounding the broader fight over control of the US Senate.
Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews’ ruling overturns a June 15 decision by Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher to disqualify the challenger and keep him off the primary ballot. Matthews’ ruling can be appealed to the state Supreme Court.
Attorneys for the state have said Tuesday is the deadline for a final ruling so that ballots for the Aug. 18 primary can be printed.
The judge ruled that the elections division’s decision to exclude Dan J. Sullivan because his candidacy was not “in good faith” was not based on the US Constitution, Alaska law or the Division’s own regulations.
“Instead, the decision was based upon a new, previously unstated, ‘good faith’ criteria,” the judge wrote.
The retired teacher from the small fishing community of Petersburg filed to challenge the incumbent in May.
Attorneys for the state did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Friday’s ruling. Jeffrey Robertson, Dan J. Sullivan’s attorney, said in an email he expects the Division of Elections to appeal the ruling and couldn’t comment until the Alaska Supreme Court rules on the case.
The controversy over the two Dan Sullivans has underscored the stakes involved in the incumbent’s reelection campaign. The Alaska race is one of about half a dozen US Senate races expected to be highly competitive in the fall, and the seat is one Democrats are trying to flip in their efforts to try to regain the majority.
The senator and his allies, including the National Republican Senatorial Committee, have condemned the challenger’s efforts to join the race, arguing his presence could confuse voters. Under Alaska’s election system, the top four candidates from the primary, regardless of party, move on to the ranked-choice November general election.
The senator has accused the challenger Sullivan of working with Democrats and the campaign of Democratic former US Rep. Mary Peltola — who is considered the senator’s main opponent — to sow confusion and boost Peltola’s chances. Peltola’s campaign and state Democrats have denied the allegation, as has the challenger.
Sen. Sullivan and Peltola are the highest-profile candidates in the crowded race and the only ones to report raising any money.
Beecher, the elections director, has said she determined the challenger Sullivan is not eligible to run because his candidacy was not filed in good faith and instead was done with an intent to confuse voters. She said he had registered to vote as Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. and, in conjunction with his candidacy, changed his party affiliation to Republican. She also cited similarities between his campaign website and the senator’s, and his work with a consultant whose clients have included some Democrats. She did not mention finding any evidence of alleged coordination.
In arguing to keep the challenger disqualified, attorneys for the state pushed back on suggestions the ballot could be designed in a way to reduce voter confusion over two candidates with the same name and party running for the same office.
“The Constitution does not require States to place a sham candidate on the ballot and then attempt to mitigate the damage through design choices,” attorney Rachel Witty, with the Alaska Department of Law, and outside attorneys Christopher Murray and Michael Francisco wrote in court filings.
Attorneys for the challenger Sullivan argued that the US Constitution lays out three exclusive qualifications for the Senate, addressing only age, citizenship and residency. They said Beecher lacked the legal authority to boot their client off the ballot.
The challenger Sullivan has said that sharing a name and party affiliation with the incumbent gave him “an instant megaphone.” But the 69-year-old retired teacher and former U.S. Forest Service employee said he had considered a run for some time and had grown frustrated with the senator.
He initially was certified on the state’s candidate list as Dan J. Sullivan, with the senator listed as Dan S. Sullivan and identified as the incumbent.
发表回复