Judge dismisses DOJ lawsuit that sought to preempt Alaska Senate results
NEWS: A federal judge just THREW OUT Trump’s DOJ lawsuit seeking to block certification of Alaska’s Senate election if Democrat Mary Peltola wins.
💫Foxy💫8This is where his lawsuit belongs
TurtlePower6Live view from the courthouse
Havenlore5The fact they had to entertain that in the first place is bullshit. It's just the President of the United States interfering with an election out in the open. NBD. Let me make it clearer, trying to rig an election.
🇨🇦Frank🇳🇱4The losses keep on coming for Trump’s lawyers (aka DOJ).
Marie*3Now if they'd just follow the law...
Buddy Spell3As it should have been. Every once in a while, the system holds.
The perennial loser has lost again. A federal judge in Alaska has thrown out Trump’s lawsuit that pre-emptively challenged the results in a Senate race featuring two candidates with the same name. www.nytimes.com/2026/11/01/u...
Willie Geist35Alaska ballot design is chaotic enough without judicial fanfiction. Can we just count the votes and let Anchorage sleep? Read more
SarahBCalif3Trump is a losing loser who’s losing BIGLY
Golf Whiskey3Their incompetence will be part of what saves us.
MidnightMinute1Ultimately, these frivolous cases don't have to win to have an impact on the MAGA cultist mindset. They just have to continually signal to their supporters that they have been cheated in their buildup to another Jan. 6 style attack on our democratic processes.
cavalrygreek1The court’s have seen through trump’s real agenda and they’re not buying it
Cyctrix1Insert The Commodores “You’re once, twice, three times a loser….”
JUST IN: DOJ says it will appeal judge's ruling throwing out lawsuit over the Dans Sullivan on Alaska ballot. Calls the dismissal 'procedural.' Earlier: www.politico.com/news/2026/11...
Derek A23I’m sorry did the DOJ in an official statement use an “aka” and a Trump nickname?? Mind you I’m old enough to remember when an EX-Potus talking to an AG was a massive scandal
CRobertBuchanan8The Trump people believe—perhaps rightfully so—that every ruling is merely "procedural" until SCOTUS lets them do it.
pentasulfate.bsky.social7Jesus god - procedural grounds? Having an adequate and legal REMEDY available is part of STANDING. There is no remedy a court can order here. No standing = no case or controversy. As Scalia wrote “What’s it to you?”.
zakatastrophy.bsky.social4I recognize the seriousness of this situation. But I must thank you for "the Dans Sullivan"
Blasé Boylan3Basically the DOJ is suing for something that can only happen in the future. So they’re using future evidence that does not and may not exist. Utterly ridiculous.
outtaflushing.bsky.social3The attorneys general everywhere thank you for your "Dans Sullivan".
Justin Levitt5This dismissal is “procedural” bc there is no procedure that lets DOJ sue over the Alaska nonsense. But there’s _also_ no federal statute addressing the substance. It’s a little like DOJ complaining that Santa’s not bringing a unicorn this Xmas, for procedural reasons.
Alan Richardson2It was dismissed with prejudice….
Breaking News: A judge in Alaska dismissed a Trump administration lawsuit that pre-emptively challenged results in the state’s Senate race that includes two candidates named Daniel Sullivan. www.nytimes.com/2026/11/01/u...
Art Martin2Thoughts and prayers for The New York Times. It must be a sad day in the newsroom, given how many resources you dedicated to this nothingburger, to try to undermine a strong-willed female Democratic politician, just days before an election.
Borders Abound1Shocked you got this headline correct @nytimes.com
BlacketihW1“Preemptively challenged.” Try interfering, rigging, cheating.
