A top Alaska election official booted a same-name Republican challenger to Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, from the primary ballot Monday, ruling the campaign appeared designed to confuse voters. 

Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher disqualified Dan J. Sullivan from the state’s hotly-contested Senate race over concerns that his candidacy was “filed with a purpose to confuse or mislead and to thereby compromise the ballot’s fairness or neutrality,” in a letter published Monday.

Dan J. Sullivan, a retired schoolteacher who filed as a Republican Senate candidate despite having no prior affiliation with the GOP, can appeal the ruling, Beecher wrote. 

The letter caps weeks of outrage from the GOP, who argued the political newcomer’s entry into the race just days before the filing deadline was a covert attempt by Democrats to recruit a “sham” candidate into the race to confuse voters.

GOP FIGHTS TO STOP MULTIPLE DAN SULLIVANS FROM APPEARING ON ALASKA BALLOT, CALLS CANDIDACY A ‘SHAM’

Under Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system, if Dan J. Sullivan had been allowed to remain on the August primary ballot, both he and Dan S. Sullivan, the incumbent, could have advanced to the general election among the top four vote-getters.

Democrats are eying Alaska as a potential flip opportunity as the party mounts a longshot bid to retake control of the upper chamber during the midterms. The incumbent Sullivan is running for a third Senate term against former Rep. Mary Peltola, D-Alaska, who was recruited by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., into the battleground contest.

Beecher cited several details about Dan J. Sullivan’s campaign that led to her conclusion that it was not filed in “good-faith.”

The political newcomer requested to appear on the ballot as “Dan Sullivan” despite registering to vote under the name “Daniel J. Sullivan, Jr.,” according to the letter. The longshot candidate also attempted to register with the incumbent’s initial on one occasion, according to Beecher’s letter.

“‘S’ is Senator Sullivan’s middle initial, not yours,” Beecher wrote.

The election official also noted that Dan J. Sullivan had not registered as a Republican before launching his Senate campaign and that his new website used a “color scheme and overall theme” similar to the incumbent’s campaign materials. 

Additionally, Beecher discussed Dan J. Sullivan’s connection to Amber Lee, an Alaska Democratic consultant who has previously supported Peltola. Metadata from the campaign’s launch identified the Democratic operative as its author, Fox News Digital previously reported. 

FORMER DEM REP. MARY PELTOLA ANNOUNCES U.S. SENATE RUN: “PUT ALASKA FIRST”

“This consultant’s work on your behalf is, in isolation, innocuous,” Beecher wrote. “Alongside the other facts I have catalogued in this letter, however, it suggests a determined effort and a deliberate attempt to use the similarity of your name to confuse Alaska voters in the upcoming primary election.”

Dan J. Sullivan’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The incumbent Sullivan previously blasted his same-name challenger as a “far-left liberal” who was complicit in Democrats’ efforts to “rig” the election.

“Is Schumer or Gillibrand and their staffs or the DSCC or the staff at the DSCC — were they aware? Were they coordinating, orchestrating?
I mean, if that’s the case, that would be a huge scandal,” Sullivan told Fox News Digital last week.

Democrats have denied any involvement with Dan J. Sullivan’s campaign. 

The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), Senate Republicans’ campaign arm, took a victory lap after urging Beecher to investigate the same-name challenger’s candidacy.

“Alaskans saw right through Chuck Schumer and Mary Peltola’s tricks to confuse and deceive them with a sham candidate,” NRSC Regional Press Secretary Nick Puglia said in a statement. “Nobody delivers for Alaskans like Senator Dan Sullivan, which is why Alaska Last Democrats like Mary Peltola are stooping so low.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Dan J. Sullivans’ attempt to qualify for the primary ballot also sparked sharp criticism from Senate Republicans, who are expected to aggressively campaign to defend Sullivan’s seat.

“Even by Chuck Schumer’s low standards, this was an outrageous attempt to trick Alaska voters and rig the election,” Senate Republican Conference Chairman Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said Monday.

1871, pursuant to the Ku Klux Klan Act, Grant declared martial law and suspended habeas corpus in nine hill counties of South Carolina, where the Klan was particularly intractable.

IV.

World War II

Habeas corpus rights were tested in two important contexts during World War II.

A. Hawaii

First, at the outset of hostilities with Japan, the Governor of Hawaii, then a territory, declared martial law and suspended habeas corpus, acting pursuant to the Hawaiian Organic Act. In 1946, the Supreme Court decided Duncan v. Kahanamoku, a challenge by a civilian against his arrest and conviction by a military tribunal. The Court ruled that the suspension of habeas rights and the trial were improper, because civilian courts in Hawaii were operating at the time of his conviction.

B. German saboteurs

Second, and more important, was the case of the trial of German saboteurs by military commission, which reached the Supreme Court as Ex Parte Quirin. In December 1941, eight German agents, including two U.S. citizens, were carried by U-boat across the Atlantic and landed on Long Island in New York and on Ponte Vedra Beach in Florida. Two turned themselves in to the FBI. The remainder were captured.

President Roosevelt, acting by executive order, established a military tribunal to prosecute the eight. All were convicted and sentenced to death, although President Roosevelt commuted the sentences of the two who had surrendered, leaving the other six to be executed.

The Supreme Court reviewed the constitutionality of the military tribunal, and held that it was allowable because of the specific nature of the defendants and the crimes alleged. Because they were unlawful enemy combatants in a time of war, they were subject to the jurisdiction and judgment of military tribunals, and even for the American citizens in the group the writ of habeas corpus was unavailable. The Supreme Court rested its opinion in part on the fact that, through its declaration of war, Congress had authorized the application of the laws of war to enemy combatants, effectively suspending any habeas rights for this class of individuals that would otherwise have existed.

V.

Global War on Terror

After the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, the United States began holding detainees at Camp X-Ray, Naval Station Guantanamo Bay. In 2002, some of these detainees began filing

EXCLUSIVE — President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs promise is facing challenges from a new analysis that argues the sweeping trade policy failed to revive manufacturing and instead slowed job creation in the U.S.

The report, obtained first by Fox News Digital, lands months after Trump’s signature economic policies was handed a blow when the Supreme Court struck down sweeping tariffs, and businesses are now seeking billions of dollars in tariff refunds.

Trump’s April 2025 global tariff rollout marked the largest U.S. tariff hike in decades, delivering on a signature economic promise that higher duties would spark a manufacturing renaissance, bring factory jobs back to the United States and reduce Americans’ reliance on foreign goods.

Researchers at the Advancing American Freedom Foundation argue those goals never materialized, and estimate in their report that the tariffs resulted in up to 1 million fewer jobs nationwide than would have been expected under pre-tariff trends.

TRUMP SAYS US WOULD BE ‘DESTROYED’ WITHOUT TARIFF REVENUE

Manufacturing — the industry the tariffs were intended to help — fared particularly poorly, according to the damning report. Researchers estimate the sector lost roughly 75,000 positions during the policy’s first year, or about 6,250 jobs per month.

“We can say with an over 90% confidence level that manufacturing lost jobs because of the tariffs,” Richard Stern, vice president of the Plymouth Institute for Free Enterprise at Advancing American Freedom, told Fox News Digital.

Stern argued the tariffs backfired because many American manufacturers rely on imported components and equipment.

“Most of the Americans that are importing are American businesses, especially American manufacturers and producers,” he said. “So the tariffs really ended up being a tax on high-end American manufacturing.”

‘WE WERE RIGHT’: HE TOOK TRUMP’S TARIFFS TO THE SUPREME COURT AND WON

If nothing else, the tariffs proved to be a windfall for Washington.

Duties climbed from $9.6 billion in March 2025 to $23.9 billion by May, according to Treasury data. By the end of the 2025 fiscal year, tariff collections reached $215.2 billion, roughly triple pre-tariff levels.

In January alone, duties totaled $30.4 billion, up about 242% from $8.9 billion a year earlier. Tariff revenue for the current fiscal year has already reached roughly $230 billion, more than four times the amount collected during the same period last year.

ONE YEAR LATER, TRUMP TARIFFS GENERATED BILLIONS AS REFUNDS TAKE SHAPE

FLOURISH CHART SHOWING TARIFF REVENUE: 29325373

But the report from AAFF, which was founded by former Vice President Mike Pence in 2021, contends the tariffs’ revenue success came at a cost.

Researchers found employment growth weakened across most sectors after the tariffs took effect, with manufacturing and trade-related industries among the hardest hit. Their analysis found a 99.9% probability that job growth slowed following the policy change.

When reached for comment about the report’s findings, White House spokesman Kush Desai did not address the claims, but instead took a swipe at the group, telling Fox News Digital: “Another useless memo is still not going to make Mike Pence relevant again.” 

AFTER SUPREME COURT BLOW, TRUMP ADMIN LAUNCHES $166B TARIFF REFUND PORTAL

Beyond employment, the report points to higher costs for American households and businesses.

According to the report, about 90% of the tariff burden fell on U.S. importers rather than foreign producers. The authors estimate the average American family paid about $1,000 more in tariff-related costs during 2025.

While businesses are seeking refunds following the Supreme Court’s ruling, Stern argued that repayment cannot reverse broader economic damage caused during the tariff period.

“You can’t undo the damage. You can’t undo a factory,” Stern said. “There are many that closed in America because they couldn’t get their hands on products used for manufacturing.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The report concludes that the tariffs “unlawfully taxed American families, wiped out nearly a million jobs, and were ultimately ruled illegal.”

The findings add a new dimension to the ongoing debate over Trump’s trade agenda, challenging the argument that higher tariffs would revive domestic manufacturing and create American jobs.

Read the full report: