Waterbiking

Regulars here know that there will be a bit more than just Waterbiking. 

Our kids gathered on Bainbridge Island last week for a family celebration.  We had a good time in pleasant weather, all the nicer knowing we were missing a week of rain in Anchorage.  The views from my window seat weren't spectacular on the way back yesterday.  As we got to Prince William Sound, we were already told to prep for landing early - trays up, electronics unplugged, etc.  Then the next 20 minutes or so were variations of gray clouds with one brief opening where I could see land below.  That darker stretch is Fire Island, but even parts of it are clouded over.  We did have a smooth landing.  

So I'd been wondering whether I would have decent biking weather to get to my dermatologist appointment today.  The weather app wasn't hopeful last night, but this morning when I opened the shades, there was even sunshine!  My doctor has moved since my last appointment.  He was in the Providence medical high rises.  Now he's in midtown - the modern glassy building on C St. between Northern Lights and Benson.  I noticed the sign in the elevator - Self Cleaning Buttons.  Never noticed a sign like that before.

So here, from Elevator Consultants Solutions:

"Key Highlights

• In today's world, nanoseptic self-cleaning buttons are changing the game for places lots of people touch.
• These innovative buttons clean themselves using nanoseptic technology, so there's no need to use regular cleaners on them.
• The magic behind their cleaning power is a powerful oxidation reaction from mineral crystals that get energy from light you can see.
• This process breaks down nasty stuff like organic contaminants into harmless things such as CO2, making everything safer and cleaner.
• Not only do they work well, but these buttons also last a long time. They're a solid choice for keeping germs at bay.
• With nanoseptic button covers, upgrading those high-touch spots becomes easy and does wonders for public health."

The office takes up the whole 8th floor.  My exam room was on the northeast corner.  I've reserved the room for all future visits.  

And then I was done, with the sun still shining.  So I headed off along C Street to Dowling to pick up the Campbell Creek south trail. 

The water was muddy and  high as it passed under C Street.  I was concerned about what the Arctic underpass would look like. With good reason. A biker and his dog came the other way.  Okay, let's do it.  

I came out the other side with wet feet - I'm guessing it was six or seven inches deep at the deepest point.   So, how is the Minnesota underpass going to be?  

Not as bad as Arctic, but it does go on a bit further on the other side.  

So where the trail ends I decided to go back on Dimond and get back to the trail at C Street. Dimond's
not the nicest biking environment, so I went exploring on Vernye Place, which quickly becomes Della and that connects with Runamuck Place.  

It's only a short block long and Wakefield is a dead end, between Dimond and Campbell Creek.

So back up to Dimond.  The sidewalk deadened near the Minnesota overpass, but a path went down to the bike trail on the other side of the bridge (so I didn't have to go through the puddles again.)  

At Arctic, to avoid the deep water, I went back up to Dimond where I saw this assortment of political signs:

This is why a lot of folks were upset when Matt Shultz pulled out of the US House race.  Here's Independent Bill Hill's sign up with a Sullivan (the Senator, I assume, not Daniel J.)  The Bronson and Church (for Governor) and McGuire and Rasmussen (for Governor}.  All the others are Republicans.  What is he telling Republicans that he's not telling Democrats?  Or does this mean the Republicans really don't like Rep. Nick Begich?

Because I also see Bill Hill signs next to Mary Peltola signs.  If he pulls it off, there will be some upset voters when he picks a side to caucus with.

At C Street, back down to the bike trail and home.  Well one more detour.  I'm sure the underpass at Old Seward Highway will be flooded, so I get off at the new bridge over Campbell Creek - which is 50th and cross Old Seward and get back on the trail on the other side of the bridge.  Sure enough, it's also got lots of water.  Plus it has lots of bumps.  

This is across the creek from the Arctic Road Runner.  

July has only gotten about three inches of rain so far.  While that's three times the normal rainfall, it's not t really a lot of rain over three weeks, though much of it probably came this last week.  And I suspect there was more rain in the mountains where the creek originates.  

But I hope these flood zones are on the Municipalities fix list.  

It's dark and cloudy again as I finish this post at 3pm.  

Why Google, Do You Do This To Me? [UPDATED]

 I’m on Bainbridge Island for a short notice, brief family gathering. 

I don’t think it’s the travel that has made blogging harder.  It’s the general overload of negative stimuli.  There’s too much to write.  Nothing to write that others haven’t covered more than I can, but still not adequately.  

So, my fallback is recent photos.  [And since I’m traveling I took my iPad instead of my MacBook and there’s all sorts of little quirks.  I mastered most of them last fall when I had the iPad with me in Turkey, but I have to relearn them.  Like just now when I clicked to upload photos, it tells me I can’t unless I sign in with my Google account or allow cookie access to proceed.  Well, I already did the google account sign in to be able to start blogging.  And unlike my laptop where it has a button to allow cookie access, in the iPad it has a button for more information.  And the information isn’t helpful.  On my laptop I can go to Safari preferences but doing that on the iPad isn’t as straightforward.  So probably there won’t be a post tonight.  No, let me post this and when I figure out how to get the pictures up, I’ll add them to this.]

I’d add that when I started blogging on Blogspot, it hadn’t yet been bought by google. And Apple shares some of the blame.  The stuff I need is there, I know.  Just in a different place with a different symbol.  

A few minutes later.  I googled again on how to unblock cookies.  It told me to go to apps and then find Safari.  

It was already unblocked.  I blocked it and unblocked it again.  Back to Blogger, and this time it worked.  Grrrrr!

“THESE CHARGES ARE OF A PERSONAL CHARACTER, AND WHILE THEY SEEM TO BE SUSTAINED BY THE RECORD OF THE TRIAL AND THE PAPERS BEFORE ME AND TEND TO SHOW THAT THE TRIAL WAS NOT FAIR. I DO NOT CARE TO DISCUSS THIS FEATURE OF THE CASE ANY FURTHER, BECAUSE IT IS NOT NECESSARY.  I AM CONVINCED THAT IT IS CLEARLY MY DUTY TO ACT IN THIS CASE FOR THE REASONS ALREADY GIVEN, AND I, THEREFORE, GRANT AN ABSOLUTE PARDON TO SAMUEL FIELDEN, OSCAR NEEBE AND MICHAEL SCHWAB THIS 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 1890.

JOHN P. ALTGELD,

GOVERNOR OF ILLINOIS”

The Sunday Solidarity book club is reading Fight Like Hell by Kim Kelly.  It’s a review of people who fought for the rights of workers in the US since the early 1800s.  One section focused on Lucy Parsons and the Haymarket Eight.  

“On May 4, 1886, a mass meeting of workers gathered in Chicago’s Haymarket Square to listen to a handful of local anarchists and labor organizers speak in support of workers at the nearby McCormick Reaper Works, who were on strike for an eight-hour workday and had been viciously attacked by police the day before.  Among the speakers were Lucy’s husband, Albert, August Spies, and Samuel Fielden, three anarchists who were steadfast advocates for the eight-hour workday movement that had been gathering momentum among the city’s laboring classes.  [Albert Parsons spoke] 

Fielden was up next, and as he was finishing his speech, police arrived to break up the rally.  A bomb was thrown into the path of the advancing phalanx, and the cops began firing wildly into the crowd.  In less than five minutes the square was emptied, eleven people were dead, and more than seventy had been injured.  Despite the fog of chaos making it nearly impossible to tell who had done what exactly in the melee, Parsons, Spies, Fielden, and fellow anarchists Adolph Fischer, George Engel, Michael Schwab, Oscar Neebe, and Louis Lingg were arrested and tried for conspiracy and murder.  There was no firm evidence connecting any of the men to the bombing itself, and as one policeman who’d been present told a reporter, ‘A very large number of the police were wounded by each other’s revolvers.’

”An openly hostile judge and jury, along with the public’s distrust of the defendants’ anarchists politics, sealed their fates.  All were declared guilty, with Parsons and Pies among the four sentenced to the gallows.”  (Fight Like Hell 61-62)

The book then mentions there’s a memorial for the Haymarket Massacre in Forest Park, Illinois.  I have good friends who live in Oak Park, the next suburb over.  So I asked them to check out the memorial and send me some pictures for the book club.  And that’s one of them above. Thanks Norma and Lewis.

 

At that Sunday Solidarity meeting after the book club, one of the activities was putting together comfort kits for kids who have had trauma in their lives.  There were small blue fabric boxes that we filled with balloons, tiny stuffed animals, colored pencils, small coloring books, a timer, and other goodies. 

Although I’ve gotten the photos up, they are not responding to the normal controls to move to the left, center, or right.  Below is a picture from the Bear Tooth theater where we saw Argentina defeat Switzerland.  That was Saturday, before the meeting on Sunday, but I just can’t move the pictures around predictably so I’ll leave it here.  

 

Tuesday morning we were on a plane in Anchorage, waiting to take off in the rain.  Not complaining, rain is good and we were taking off on time for Seattle.

We got to Seattle and took the light rail to the ferry.  We were hoping to catch the 3:50pm ferry and we were cutting it a bit tight.  But it turned out that both the 3pm and 3:50 ferries had been cancelled and we eventually got the 4:45 ferry.

   

But because of the two cancelled ferries, the crowd in the terminal had gotten way bigger than normal.

[“A Way With Words”. Metal art by Rob Satterwhite. There’s a phone number, so if you want to buy it, contact me and I’ll get it to you.  At $95 it’s a bargain compared to other art works there.]

There was a small art exhibit in the Bainbridge Island library today and I liked the quote of this piece.  I think you should be able to read it.  

And there’s lots of heather blooming.

And that’s that.  One of the most frustrating posting experiences in a long time.  

Silence [UPDATE: Ballots Printed And Overseas Ballots Sent]

[See update below]

The Division of Elections said it had a June 28 deadline to print primary ballots. 

But then they took Daniel J. Sullivan off the ballot in the US Senate race and were challenged in court and required to put him back on by the Superior and then Alaska Supreme Court. 

Then a sample ballot appeared on their website which left off Daniel J.'s political party and added "Incumbent" to Senator Dan S Sullivan's name on the ballot.  (Honorifics are not allowed and someone checked the last four elections and reported that no one had 'incumbent' by their name.)

Since then there's been almost complete silence.  

• Were the ballots printed?  If so, what do they look like?
• Did Daniel J. file any sort of legal complaint?  
• What do the judges think about all this?  They said they'd trust the professionalism of the Division of Elections, but that was clearly a mistake.  

The only word has been from NBC saying the US Department of Justice and the Alaska Attorney General's office are investigating a conspiracy around putting Daniel J. on the ballot. Because he was trying to confuse the public.  I can think of others they should investigate first on that charge.   

Do you think the Republicans are worried about losing the Senate?

It's July 7 already and no word.  Yes, the July 4 holiday took up some time.  In fact the Division of Elections office in Anchorage was closed Friday AND Monday.  

[UPDATE:  July 7, 2026:  I stopped by the Anchorage Division of Elections again today to drop off a voter registration form. (I'm a voter registrar.)  The door was locked.  Entry required me to call them.

When the door finally opened, I handed off the registration form and I had two questions. 

1. Were the primary ballots printed?  The woman answered, "Yes and they were sent to overseas voters last week."  
2. My follow up question was: what did the Senate ballot say? "The sample ballot is on our website."  Below is a copy of the sample ballot for District 1. (They show the ballots for each district to show that the order of the names is rotated for each district as required by law.)

As you can see, Daniel J. Sullivan has Jr. after his name and his party was left off.  Dan S. Sullivan got to have both Republican AND "Incumbent" listed.  

The State law says:

" (4) The director may not include on the ballot, as a part of a candidate's name, any honorary or assumed title or prefix but may include in the candidate's name any nickname or familiar form of a proper name of the candidate.

(5) The names of the candidates shall be placed in separate sections on the state general election ballot under the office designation to which they were nominated. If a candidate is registered as affiliated with a political party or political group, the party affiliation, if any, may be designated after the name of the candidate, upon request of the candidate. If a candidate has requested designation as nonpartisan or undeclared, that designation shall be placed after the name of the candidate. If a candidate is not registered as affiliated with a political party or political group and has not requested to be designated as nonpartisan or undeclared, the candidate shall be designated as undeclared."

Therefore, as I read this, placing "Incumbent" after the current Senator's name would seem to fall into the category of 'honorary or assumed title'.  I believe it was the Chief Justice who raised this in the Supreme Court hearing.  Sen. Dan's attorney brushed it off.

And Daniel J.'s political party - Republican- should have been printed under his name.  No matter how much the GOP argue that he only recently registered as a Republican, there is nothing that addresses when one registered, except it has to be done before you turn in the forms for candidacy.  

Is Daniel J.'s attorney working on this?  I don't know.  This is where we are today, as far as I can tell.  

[UPDATE:  I did email Daniel J.'s attorney and he responded that he can't comment at this time.]

Related Posts:

June 22, 2026 Senator Dan Sullivan Does Not Want To Run Against Dan Sullivan [UPDATE] 

June 23, 2026 The Dan J Sullivan Removal From Ballot Hearing 

June 25, 2026  Daniel J. Appeal Of Division Of Elections Decision Plays Out In Nearly Empty Court Room

June 26, 2026 It's Almost 7pm -I Can't Find The Sullivan Decision - [Update - His Name Goes Back On The Ballot]  

June 28, 2026

Supreme Court Hearing On Daniel J. Sullivan v Alaska Division of Elections Appeal On Zoom Only

Monday, June 29, 2026   Alaska Division Of Elections v Daniel J. Sullivan At Supreme Court

Monday, June 29, 2026   Supreme Court Keeps Daniel J. Sullivan On The Ballot 

Tuesday, June 30, 2026  Division of Election's Sample Ballot Leaves Off Daniel J's Party Affiliation

The Anchorage Bike Trails Restore Me

 Writing on politics these days can get one down.  But riding on Anchorage bike trails can restore one's sense of well  being.  Here are some pictures from the last couple of weeks.  

Campbell Creek reflecting the afternoon sun. 

 

A grebe in Westchester Lagoon

A moose off in the distance.  We're about 1/4 mile from a major road in Anchorage.  But on the bike trail, at times like this I feel like I'm in the middle of the wilderness

New goslings huddle  (in the lower right} at the Alaska Native Medical Center (ANMC) campus

The path through the University of Alaska Anchorage

Headed home near Valley of the Moon park about 10 pm.  

For most people dandelions are weeds, but close up, they are amazing.  

On the Campbell Creek trail just west of the Seward Highway.  This is the kind of traffic blockage I don't mind.  

This spot at Goose Lake is always changing and most always spectacular.  

Division of Election's Sample Ballot Leaves Off Daniel J's Party Affiliation

The Division of Elections has a Sample Ballot posted on its website.  I believe it went up last night after the Supreme Court hearing.  

(There is another list of Senate candidates which has a red "Denied" next to Daniel J. Sullivan's name.)

The listing is for Daniel J. Sullivan Jr.   There is no party listing.  He is the only candidate with no party listing even if it is just "(Undisclosed)."  I listened to the Court arguments yesterday and to part of the hearing again today.  It was my impression that the Court expected a party designation of Republican next to Daniel J.'s name. Though they never explicitly said so.  

My comment at the end of yesterday's post was that I had less confidence that the Division would do the right thing than the Court seemed to have.  The Republican Party, from the national level (the  National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC)  made the first complaint about Daniel J.  Sullivan being on the ballot) to the many states that sent in amicus briefs supporting the Division's decision to delete Daniel J. from the ballot, to the Alaska Republican Party which filed two more complaints, and whose members include Lt. Governor Dahlstrom (who oversees elections) and the Division head Beecher.  

And here we are.  Today's the day the ballots are scheduled to be printed.  The Division's attorney, Chris Murray, did say that if Sullivan doesn't like how his name appears on the ballot he can appeal it.  But, as Chief Justice Carney replied, the time is short.  

Here's the ballot that's up on the site now:  

Thank you to Matthew Beck who posted this last night on Bluesky

Below is my transcript of part of Monday's court hearing.  As I listened to it, I noticed several things.  

1.  Mr. Murray is good at saying he agrees with what a Justice just said, but then he twists it in his own favor.  

2.  The Justices - particularly Chief Justice Carney - appeared to believe that Daniel J. Sullivan had registered as a Republican before filing and that he should have that designation by his name.  Though Mr. Murray casts doubt on Daniel J's Republican credentials:"if or to the extent that he ever registered with the Republican Party  he did when he filed his declaration of candidacy"

3.  Mr. Murray points out he can be listed as a Republican or nothing at all.  He keeps that option open, though what I heard from the justices was that he was a Republican and should be listed that way.  

4.  Murray points out that if Sullivan doesn't like his designation, he can appeal it, but Chief Justice Carney immediately points out the time crunch.  

"Chief Justice Carney:  49:09  The Division’s proposal  not to list him as a Republican after certifying his declaration of candidacy as a Republican would appear to be a little outside its discretion, wouldn’t it?  Don’t they have to list him as Republican?

Chris Murray: I would respectfully disagree there and I would point you Madame Chief Justice to Alaska Statute 151530 Subsection  5.  If you look there, this talks about how the ballot is prepared.  What’s got to go on there, basically the Division must do and what the Division can do. And I would point you to the second sentence of that subsection. which says, if a candidate is registered as affiliated with a party or group it doesn’t - it doesn’t sound as if there is any debate here, Mr. Sullivan, if or to the extent that he ever registered with the Republican Party  he did when he filed his declaration of candidacy

Justice Henderson:  He registered

Murray:  Justice Henderson, I wanted to get to the next piece.

Justice Henderson:   I don’t see anything in this subsection that allows the Division to force someone to have a descriptor in terms of affiliation, political affiliation,  that is contrary to what they requested.

Murray:  So, there Your Honor, I agree with you.  And in our briefing we suggested that he be listed as non-partisan.  I will say that’s a product of speed, it’s simply not correct.  I think he could be listed as Republican or nothing at all.  That’s what could be done.  So, I think you make a very fair point there.  But I will say that when it comes to the partisan affiliation, the statute says it may be designated after the name of the candidate. 

Chief Justice Carney:  Well, if you journey back to felons in Outside prisons part of that appeal was that if the Democrats didn’t really want to associate with a felon in an Outside prison, right?  He got to appear on the ballot as a Democrat did he not?

Murray:  In that case again, there was never a challenge from, the Division never made any findings on that.  The context of the Beecher case was, can you elevate more than one from fifth place for the top fou, I know this court is very familiar with it.  You decided it.

Chief Justice Carney:  Absolutely.  But the Division’s briefing at the Superior Court there has multiple references to, for example on page 17 of his opposition to his motion below, “Mr. Hafner is qualified.  He correctly completed his declaration of candidacy.  That was as a Democrat. That was what he was listed ultimately, as a Democrat on the ballot.

Murray:  I also don’t believe there was any question    as a Democrat out of state.  Here again I would say that if the determination regarding how Mr Sullivan goes on the ballot that he doesn’t like,  he does have a right to challenge it.  I’d hate to do it, but he does have a right to challenge it.  We don’t deny that.    

Chief Justice Carney:  You may have noticed that the time is running short?

Murray:  There’s no question about that, Madame Chief Justice and I would also  like to echo what Mr. Robinson said that we appreciate both Judge Matthews below and this court’s expeditious hearing here.  We would ask the court, if it decides Mr. Sullivan has to go on the ballot, that it remand and let the division make the determination about how he goes on the ballot. If the court is unwilling to do that, we ask that the court direct us to do that, but we don’t think that’s this courts place"

I tried to call the number listed for Mr. Sullivan on the other sample ballot, but, understandably, it's blocking callers.  Will he take advantage of the appeal that Mr. Murray mentioned?  We'll see.  

Is this worth all the time we've spent on it?  The Republicans seem to think so.  Sen. Sullivan is listed as one of the more vulnerable Republican US Senators.  Having Republcan next to his name probably would get Daniel J. more votes.  If Sen. Sullivan is not reelected and a few other incumbent Republican senators lose, the US Senate would become majority Democratic and that would greatly change the direction of the country.  So it is a big deal.  

Related Posts:

June 22, 2026 Senator Dan Sullivan Does Not Want To Run Against Dan Sullivan [UPDATE] 

June 23, 2026 The Dan J Sullivan Removal From Ballot Hearing  

June 25, 2026  Daniel J. Appeal Of Division Of Elections Decision Plays Out In Nearly Empty Court Room

June 26, 2026 It's Almost 7pm -I Can't Find The Sullivan Decision - [Update - His Name Goes Back On The Ballot]  

June 28, 2026

Supreme Court Hearing On Daniel J. Sullivan v Alaska Division of Elections Appeal On Zoom Only

Monday, June 29, 2026   Alaska Division Of Elections v Daniel J. Sullivan At Supreme Court

Monday, June 29, 2026   Supreme Court Keeps Daniel J. Sullivan On The Ballot 

Tuesday, June 30, 2026  Division of Election's Sample Ballot Leaves Off Daniel J's Party Affiliation

Tuesday, July 7, 2026  Silence [UPDATE: Ballots Printed And Overseas Ballots Sent]

Supreme Court Keeps Daniel J. Sullivan On The Ballot [Updated]

[UPDATE:  I got a fuller image - the whole first page {the second page is a list of people who got copies).  I've also added some personal reactions. The original image cut parts off, but was easier to read, so I'll add it on the bottom of the post.]

As I read this, they are saying his name must be on the ballot and it's up to the Division of Elections to determine how he will be listed on the ballot.  

I have this funny feeling that the Division is going to list him as Daniel J. Sullivan (that's ok) but they really don't want to put Republican next to his name.  If they don't, they could be sued for not following the law, but the ballot would be printed.  

But does it matter?  I suspect there will be a number of folks who are not happy with the current Sen. Dan Sullivan but also not ready to vote for a Democrat, who will vote for Daniel J.  

An easier to read image of the key parts:

Related Posts:

June 22, 2026 Senator Dan Sullivan Does Not Want To Run Against Dan Sullivan [UPDATE] 

June 23, 2026 The Dan J Sullivan Removal From Ballot Hearing  

June 25, 2026  Daniel J. Appeal Of Division Of Elections Decision Plays Out In Nearly Empty Court Room

June 26, 2026 It's Almost 7pm -I Can't Find The Sullivan Decision - [Update - His Name Goes Back On The Ballot]  

June 28, 2026

Supreme Court Hearing On Daniel J. Sullivan v Alaska Division of Elections Appeal On Zoom Only

Monday, June 29, 2026   Alaska Division Of Elections v Daniel J. Sullivan At Supreme Court

Monday, June 29, 2026   Supreme Court Keeps Daniel J. Sullivan On The Ballot 

Tuesday, June 30, 2026  Division of Election's Sample Ballot Leaves Off Daniel J's Party Affiliation

Tuesday, July 7, 2026  Silence [UPDATE: Ballots Printed And Overseas Ballots Sent]

Alaska Division Of Elections v Daniel J. Sullivan At Supreme Court

AK Div of Elections v. Daniel J. Sullivan live at www.ktoo.org/gavel

Depending on whether I'm looking at the clock on my laptop, phone, or watch, it is now 10:07, 10:15, or 10:10 and I have the screen up but nothing has happened yet.  Oh, yes - now it says delayed start.  

[Screenshot from KTOO Gavel Alaska]  

 

Not sure what that means.  I was told the courtroom wouldn't be open today and I assumed it meant everyone was zooming in.  That was the case of the Superior Court hearing Thursday - none of the participants were there live, including the judge, but the courtroom was open and there were about a dozen people in the gallery.  

10:22 - Delay notice gone, Gavel banging.

Oh dear.  My notes are pretty sketchy.  I'm not sure I should leave them up.  The video is supposed to be up for anyone to listen to.  Let me try to get the gist up and then I'll decide whether my notes should go up as well.  

Basically, Chris Murray, attorney for the Division of Elections, began arguing that Sullivan is on the ballot to confuse the voters and so should be removed, and the justices are asking where it says that's a reason for taking him off the ballot.  

Aren't the voters smart enough?

Murray is standing hard that Sullivan was on the ballot only to confuse the voters and the Court keeps questioning him about that.  

[Left to right starting with top row:

Susan M. Carney, Chief Justice, Justice Jennifer Henderson;  Second row: Justice Jude Pate, Justice Aimee A. Oravec;  Attorney for Div of Elections: Chris Murray;

Third row:  Attorney for Daniel J. Sullivan] [Screenshot from KTOO Gavel Alaska]

[It was impossible for me to read their names correctly from the screen.  They were just too small, though clearer than the screenshot above.]

The justices seemed to come down pretty hard on that point.  

They also  questioned Jeffrey Robinson closely when it was his turn.  

My sense is that the decision to bump Daniel J. Sullivan from the ballot will not prevail.  That leaves questions about how his name will appear and how much the court will direct how his name will appear or whether they will leave it up to the Division of Elections.  

Some of the questions about the name:

1. Will it be Dan Sullivan, Daniel J. Sullivan?  Dan J. Sullivan?  His attorney seemed to want it to be as close to Sen. Sullivan's name as possible, while still be distinguishable.  
2. Will he be designated as a Republican?  It seems that he did officially change his party to Republican and so the Division would have to use that, but I'm not certain.
3. Will the Supreme Court tell the Division how to write his name and party, or leave that up to the discretion of the Division of Elections?  This wasn't clear.  Both attorneys said they trusted the Division to be professional.  Justice Matthews of the Superior Court instructed them.  I'm not sure that the Supreme Court will do the same.  Though there is very little time between now and when they start printing ballots tomorrow.  If the Division butchers his name and party designation, there will be no time to appeal.  

They promised to get the order out very quickly, but the opinion explaining their decision would come later.  

The recording of the session is up on KTOO Gavel Alaska and I've embedded it below so you can check my understanding of what's left with what they said.  I'll try to do the same.  

You should be able to click on the play button and listen yourself and I'll not post my sketchy notes of they arguments.

Chief Justice Carney at the end:  An extraordinary schedule.  We greatly appreciate your depth of arguments.  We will do our best to get at least an order out, will take longer to get opinion out.  Apologize for my computer,  Recessed.  

11:20 am

Related Posts

June 22, 2026 Senator Dan Sullivan Does Not Want To Run Against Dan Sullivan [UPDATE] 

June 23, 2026 The Dan J Sullivan Removal From Ballot Hearing  

June 25, 2026  Daniel J. Appeal Of Division Of Elections Decision Plays Out In Nearly Empty Court Room

June 26, 2026 It's Almost 7pm -I Can't Find The Sullivan Decision - [Update - His Name Goes Back On The Ballot]  

June 28, 2026

Supreme Court Hearing On Daniel J. Sullivan v Alaska Division of Elections Appeal On Zoom Only

Monday, June 29, 2026   Alaska Division Of Elections v Daniel J. Sullivan At Supreme Court

Monday, June 29, 2026   Supreme Court Keeps Daniel J. Sullivan On The Ballot 

Tuesday, June 30, 2026  Division of Election's Sample Ballot Leaves Off Daniel J's Party Affiliation

Tuesday, July 7, 2026  Silence [UPDATE: Ballots Printed And Overseas Ballots Sent]

Supreme Court Hearing On Daniel J. Sullivan v Alaska Division of Elections Appeal On Zoom Only

 I sent in an application to use my camera at the Alaska Supreme Court chambers tomorrow for the hearing. 

I got this email back from Meredith Montgomery, who, among other things, does media relations for the Alaska Supreme Court.  She's working on Sunday!

"The oral argument will be on ZOOM only; the courtroom will NOT be open. To watch, please tune into KTOO’s Gavel TV, which can be found at www.ktoo.org/gavel. In addition to being able to watch live, the argument will be archived immediately for viewing at any time in the future. If you are going to reproduce images from a screen shot, the “KTOO” watermark must be visible or attribution to KTOO given."

Related posts:

June 22, 2026 Senator Dan Sullivan Does Not Want To Run Against Dan Sullivan [UPDATE] 

June 23, 2026 The Dan J Sullivan Removal From Ballot Hearing  

June 25, 2026  Daniel J. Appeal Of Division Of Elections Decision Plays Out In Nearly Empty Court Room

June 26, 2026 It's Almost 7pm -I Can't Find The Sullivan Decision - [Update - His Name Goes Back On The Ballot]  

June 28, 2026

Supreme Court Hearing On Daniel J. Sullivan v Alaska Division of Elections Appeal On Zoom Only

Monday, June 29, 2026   Alaska Division Of Elections v Daniel J. Sullivan At Supreme Court

Monday, June 29, 2026   Supreme Court Keeps Daniel J. Sullivan On The Ballot 

Tuesday, June 30, 2026  Division of Election's Sample Ballot Leaves Off Daniel J's Party Affiliation

Tuesday, July 7, 2026  Silence [UPDATE: Ballots Printed And Overseas Ballots Sent]

It's Almost 7pm -I Can't Find The Sullivan Decision - [Update - His Name Goes Back On The Ballot]

Yesterday Judge Matthews promised to have his decision completed by 4:30pm today.  From what I can tell (I expected lots of media outlets to be posting what he decided by the time I got back from my bike ride at 5:30pm.  Nada) he seems not to have communicated that decision to the world yet.  Maybe the lawyers have it.  It's not on the list of files on the court's "Most Requested Case Files" 

• Sullivan, Dan J vs. Division of Elections, case no. 3AN-26-07485CI 
  • Notice of Appeal dated 6/22/2026
  • Appellant Dan J Sullivan's Unopposed Motion for Emergency Motion For Expedited Consideration of Administrative Appeal dated 6/22/2026
  • Appellant Dan J Sullivan's Affidavit of Counsel In Support of Unopposed Motion for Emergency Motion For Expedited Consideration of Administrative Appeal dated 6/22/2026
  • Appellant Dan J Sullivan's Motion For Stay Or, In the Alternative, For Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction dated 6/22/2026
  • Order Granting Unopposed Emergency Motion for Expedited Consideration of Administrative Appeal dated 6/23/2026
  • Dustin Darden's Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief dated 6/23/2026
  • Alaska Republican Party's Motion to Intervene dated 6/23/2026
  • Intervenor Alaska Republican Party's Brief dated 6/24/2026
  • Appellee Alaska Division of Elections' Brief dated 6/24/2026
  • Affidavit of Carol Beecher dated 6/24/2026
  • Appellant Dan J Sullivan's Opposition to Alaska Republican Party's Motion to Intervene dated 6/24/2026
  • Dustin Darden's Emergency Motion for Expedited Consideration of Administrative Appeal dated 6/24/2026
  • Appellant Dan J Sullivan's Reply Brief dated 6/24/2026
  • Oral Argument audio recording dated 6/25/2026
  • Appellant Dan J Sullivan's Amended Brief (original brief in Notice of Appeal above) dated 6/25/2026

[UPDATE June 26, 2026 9pm - there are two more items just added to this list:

• Order on Administrative Appeal dated 6/26/2026
• Order Denying Motion to Intervene dated 6/26/2026]

One is the judge's 32 page decision, explaining everything in detail before concluding:

"In summary, the Division's decision to exclude Mr. Sullivan from the primary ballot because it determined his declaration was not filed "in order to declare an actual good-faith candidacy for the Office of the United States Senator" was not based upon the constitutional requirements of Article l § 3, the Alaska statutes governing elections, or regulations promulgated by the Division.  Instead, the decision was based upon a new, previously unstated, "good-faith" criteria.  In addition, the Director's assertion that Mr. Sullivan seeks to confuse or misguide voters is not supported by a preponderance of evidence.  Instead, the Division accepted at face-value the assertions of the complaint and disregarded Mr. Sullivan's assertions. 

The Final Decision of the Division of Elections is VACATED.  Mr. Dan J. Sullivan is declared to be an eligible candidate for the office of United States Senator.  The Division shall include his name and affiliation with the Republican Party on the ballot for the August 18, 2026, primary election."

There's still 31 and a half pages for the attorney's on both sides to review, and for the State's attorney's to write in their appeal to the Supreme Court.  The clock is ticking to ballot printing deadline.]   

Everything else seems to be there.  You can even listen to the Oral Argument audio recording (second from the bottom.)

This is an important case.  Not just for Alaska, but for the US.  The initial complaint against Daniel J. Sullivan appearing on the ballot was filed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee.  The following two complaints were made by the Alaska Republican Party. The Dunleavy administration has frequently brought in Lower 48 attorneys to argue cases.  I suspect that in addition to trying to protect Republican Senator Sullivan in a close election, this is also a test case for getting unwanted challengers off of ballots around the country.   

For this case he's brought in the law firm of First and Fourteenth (for the Constitutional Amendments, not a street location.)  Chris Murray's bio at his law firm's website says:

"When the case is both controversial and has potentially significant impacts on the public, clients call Chris. His unique combination of experience in commercial and public law matters allows him to advise on and litigate high-stakes issues from emergency actions in elections and political matters to strategic commercial and public litigation involving issues of first impression or novel fact patterns. Chris represents a broad range of clients including businesses, political parties, trade associations, nonprofits, and even individuals in high-profile matters, both in trial and appeals. He advises on and regularly litigates federal and state constitutional issues touching on public policy, in contexts ranging from election recounts to strategic litigation against governments to preparing amicus briefs for appellate courts.

Chris also regularly advises clients on strategy for political participation and compliance with federal and state political disclosure laws."

The Alaska Current gives more on his right wing credentials. 

So it's probably better for the decision to come late, if it isn't right yet.  Anyone who's had to write something on a deadline, knows the pressure.  In this case, the deadline was one the judge imposed on himself.  

When I hear of a decision I'll add it to this post.   

Related posts:

June 22, 2026 Senator Dan Sullivan Does Not Want To Run Against Dan Sullivan [UPDATE] 

June 23, 2026 The Dan J Sullivan Removal From Ballot Hearing

June 25, 2026  Daniel J. Appeal Of Division Of Elections Decision Plays Out In Nearly Empty Court Room

June 26, 2026 It's Almost 7pm -I Can't Find The Sullivan Decision - [Update - His Name Goes Back On The Ballot]  (Current post that you're reading)

June 28, 2026

Supreme Court Hearing On Daniel J. Sullivan v Alaska Division of Elections Appeal On Zoom Only

Monday, June 29, 2026   Alaska Division Of Elections v Daniel J. Sullivan At Supreme Court

Monday, June 29, 2026   Supreme Court Keeps Daniel J. Sullivan On The Ballot 

Tuesday, June 30, 2026  Division of Election's Sample Ballot Leaves Off Daniel J's Party Affiliation

Tuesday, June 30, 2026  Division of Election's Sample Ballot Leaves Off Daniel J's Party Affiliation

Daniel J. Appeal Of Division Of Elections Decision Plays Out In Nearly Empty Court Room

 At 9:45am there were just a few people waiting outside courtroom 401a in Anchorage.  In the end, there were about 11 people there in the gallery.  There was a woman who I'm guessing was working the computer connections.  

 

Darden

No one with a speaking part, including the Judge, was in the courtroom.  The only person who had any role at all in this appeal that I could tell, was Dustin Darden.  He's a candidate in the US Senate race.  Dustin had submitted a brief, which the judge accepted as an Amicus Brief, in which he basically says that if Daniel J. can be bumped off the ballot, then what's to stop them from bumping off a candidate like himself.  

Judge Matthews was on a large screen in front of the courtroom with a background that similar, but not the same as the actual courtroom.  We never saw the attorneys on the big screen, though at the table for the parties -there was a small screen which had the view of the attorneys.  

The judge said he had the briefs from Darden and from the Alaska Republican Party and that they wouldn't speak at the hearing, but he'd consider them as amicus briefs. 

First Jeffrey Robinson representing Daniel J. spoke.  There really wasn't anything I noticed as new (not in the brief originally submitted) though he said he had added some things after reading the State's brief.  They all agreed, in the interest of speed, that if that became important later, they could take it up.  

Again, the basic argument was that there were only three criteria the state could use to exclude someone from the ballot - the ones in the Constitution  - at least 30 years old, at least nine years as a US citizen, and an inhabitant of the state when elected.  His client met all three criteria.  

He dismissed the State's claim that the administrative regs which called for not allowing names on the ballot that would mislead the public had to be removed.  It was the job of the Division of Elections to figure out how to write the names in a way that would distinguish them for the public, and the job of the campaign of Sen. Sullivan to alert the voters so they would know which one to vote for.  

He did mention a candidate in Louisiana who'd changed his name to None of the Above, but was not allowed on the ballot.

Chris Murray, represented the State Division of Elections.  He basically made the argument that the administrative code requires that the Division NOT put someone on the ballot that would mislead and confuse the public.  

The judge promised to have a decision by 4:30pm tomorrow (Friday) and if there is an appeal to the Supreme Court, there would be time.  

I would note that it seems I'd have been better off staying at home and connecting via Zoom.  The main benefit of going to the court house was that it was a nice day for a bike ride.

Some other takes:

 Liz Ruskin, Alaska Public Media

Mark Sabbatini, Juneau Independent

Thomas Lamb: Analyzing Politics That Control Our Lives  I don't know who Lamb is, other than he lives in Palmer, Alaska.  He goes through the Division of Elections arguments point by point and concludes: 

"Christopher O. Murray and Michael Francisco filed their brief on June 24, 2026. It is sophisticated, well-researched, and constitutionally wrong. Here is why, argument by argument"

Related posts:

JJune 22, 2026 Senator Dan Sullivan Does Not Want To Run Against Dan Sullivan [UPDATE] 

June 23, 2026 The Dan J Sullivan Removal From Ballot Hearing  

June 25, 2026  Daniel J. Appeal Of Division Of Elections Decision Plays Out In Nearly Empty Court Room

June 26, 2026 It's Almost 7pm -I Can't Find The Sullivan Decision - [Update - His Name Goes Back On The Ballot]  

June 28, 2026

Supreme Court Hearing On Daniel J. Sullivan v Alaska Division of Elections Appeal On Zoom Only

Monday, June 29, 2026   Alaska Division Of Elections v Daniel J. Sullivan At Supreme Court

Monday, June 29, 2026   Supreme Court Keeps Daniel J. Sullivan On The Ballot 

Tuesday, June 30, 2026  Division of Election's Sample Ballot Leaves Off Daniel J's Party Affiliation

Tuesday, July 7, 2026  Silence [UPDATE: Ballots Printed And Overseas Ballots Sent]