Alaska judge rules request by Peltola campaign for ballot data in Senate race ‘not reasonable’

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — A judge in Alaska ruled Wednesday that a request by Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mary Peltola’s campaign for a list of absentee voters whose ballots have been rejected is “not reasonable,” particularly given the time crunch election officials face as the state continues counting ballots from last week’s election.

Ballots are still being tallied in the ranked vote election, in which Peltola and two-term Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan are the main contenders, and Alaska’s is the only Senate race that remained too early to call. The state accepts ballots up to 15 days after general elections from overseas voters, making Nov. 18 the final day to receive those. That date is also the Division of Elections’ target for conducting ranked vote tabulations if no candidate wins more than 50% of the first-choice votes.

Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews ruled a day after hearing arguments in the case. Attorneys for Peltola’s campaign had sued state elections officials, seeking a list of rejected absentee ballots and the reasons for the rejections.

They said their intent was to ensure that all qualified voters have their ballots counted. But attorneys for the state maintained the information requested would violate voter privacy.

On Tuesday, Abha Khanna, an attorney for Peltola’s campaign, said the campaign wasn’t seeking to disrupt the ongoing ballot counting process. She said it has seen no cause for concern.

“As far as we can tell, the absentee ballot review process is going incredibly smoothly and we plan to keep it that way,” she said.

But Khanna argued the information sought is a matter of public record and is in line with what campaign observers have access to in locations where absentee review boards are meeting. The campaign wanted access to that information in a more centralized way, she said.

Absentee review boards meet at the Division of Elections’ regional offices, and campaigns and parties can have observers on hand to watch the process. State law includes provisions for challenging absentee ballots if there is “good reason to suspect” that a voter is ineligible to cast a ballot.

In a court filing, attorneys for the state said daily reports generated by the division with lists of absentee ballots to be reviewed are not public records because they contain confidential information and are “ephemeral working documents that are not meant for preservation.”

Michaela Thompson, who oversees the absentee ballot review boards for the division, said in an affidavit the version of the report that observers, such as those affiliated with the campaigns, receive does not include as much confidential information but does include home addresses that many voters seek to keep private.

The observers sign confidentiality agreements and cannot keep, copy or record information in the report, she said.