Judge tosses suit challenging Dem. candidate Armstrong’s residency as too early and too late

Happy Friday, Alaska!

In this edition: We’re still waiting on election results for the closest races, but let’s take a look at two election-related cases! First, a judge has tossed a lawsuit challenging Democratic House candidate Jennie Armstrong’s eligibility as being filed both too late and too early. The plaintiffs—who all back her Republican opponent—will need to wait until once the election is completed to get their day in court. Meanwhile, APOC commissioners have issued subpoenas to two officials with the Republican Governors Association accused of illegally coordinating their pro-Dunleavy independent expenditure group with Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s campaign. It’s one of two high-profile complaints against the group that consumed wayyyyy too much space in this newsletter. Also, weekend watching.

Programming note: We’re still waiting on election results that were planned to be out today. I’ve got tickets to the Great Alaska Shootout at UAA tonight, so I’ll plan on an election update either tomorrow or during Sunday football.

Follow the results here.

Current mood: 🏀

The Midnight Sun Memo by Matt Buxton is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Judge tosses suit challenging Dem. candidate Armstrong’s residency as too early and too late

Anchorage Superior Court Judge Herman Walker today dismissed a lawsuit challenging whether Democratic candidate Jennie Armstrong met the residency requirement to run for a House seat in West Anchorage, finding that it was filed both too early and too late.

The dismissal comes at the request of the Division of Elections and Armstrong, who both argued that the lawsuit should have either been filed during the 10-day window following the filing deadline in June or in the 10-day window following the review of an election later this month through an election challenge.

Judge Walker agreed.

“As the Division correctly points out, Plaintiffs are contesting the election after one door has closed and another is not yet open; they do not bring their claim under any established means to challenge elections,” he wrote in his order dismissing the case. “Indeed, Plaintiffs raise contentious factual assertions that may invalidate Armstrong’s candidacy, but that is not for the court to decide at this stage.”

The Plaintiffs—a group of four Anchorage residents who have all contributed financially to Armstrong’s Republican opponent—have claimed their case rests solely on constitutional grounds, akin to an ongoing case challenging the eligibility of far-right Republican Rep. David Eastman and are asking the certification of the race to be put on hold while the issue plays out.

Walker noted key differences.

Namely, that the cases deal with entirely different parts of the Alaska Constitution with entirely different levels of enforcement. A major element of the Eastman case is the Division of Election’s lack of mechanism to enforce the state’s disloyalty clause, but there are two direct avenues to challenge a candidate’s residency requirements: a challenge after the filing deadline or after the election is completed.

Armstrong holds a 10-point lead over Republican Liz Vazquez, a difference of 737 votes, in the race for House District 16. Additional votes are set to be counted today.

What that means is the challenge—which is based on a handful of social media postings and fishing license applications that they say show Armstrong had not lived in Alaska for the full three years necessary to establish her residency when she filed—can still go forward once the election is finalized through an election contest.

Such a contest has a higher bar to be filed than the existing lawsuit. It would require either 10 residents or the losing candidate to file the challenge. Plaintiffs’ attorney Stacey Stone has first-hand experience with election challenges because she was the lead attorney in challenging Rep. Lance Pruitt’s 11-vote loss in 2020.

The outcome could also be less predictable than the disqualification the plaintiffs are seeking. If Armstrong is ultimately disqualified, Walker could award the election to Vazquez despite coming in a distance second place, allow the existing appointment process where the governor could fill the vacant seat with a person same political party who could get the approval of Democratic legislators or order a new election.

Stay tuned.

APOC OKs subpoenas for Republican Governors Association execs in Dunleavy coordination case

Members of the Alaska Public Offices Commission issued subpoenas to two officials with the Republican Governors Association accused of illegally coordinating their pro-Dunleavy independent expenditure group with Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s campaign.

The subpoenas were issued on Wednesday, following a closed-door meeting to discuss staff investigators’ request to compel testimony after attempts to work directly with the officials went unanswered. The order gives the two executives—RGA Executive Director Dave Rexrode and RGA CFO Erim Canligil—until next Wednesday to respond.

The core complaint was brought by Alaska Public Interest Research Group and the 907 Initiative and argues the independent expenditure group illegally coordinated with Dunleavy, violating laws intended to keep candidates separated from unlimited corporate spending. They point, primarily, to the fact that longtime Dunleavy ally Brett Huber was hired as a contractor while he was still officially part of Dunleavy’s personal campaign while also holding a $50,000 sole-source contract with the Dunleavy administration.

Huber and the Dunleavy campaign have argued there was nothing untoward about the arrangement, claiming his listing on the Dunleavy campaign was simply an oversight and he had no meaningful contact with the campaign well before he signed the consulting contract with the group. During testimony before APOC, Huber went on to downplay his $80,000 contract with A Stronger Alaska and said he occasionally looked over materials and took local meetings.

APOC commissioners decided to punt on any action ahead of the election after they found no evidence of "ongoing coordination," allowing the group to continue to campaign in favor of the governor (who is on pace to win). They relegated the issue to the usual staff-driven investigation, which had been delayed in the first place by RGA and ASA’s refusal to respond to the APOC investigators without subpoenas.

Attorneys for the groups said the initial requests were too broad but were cagey about whether they would respond if investigators asked for a narrower set of documents. Still, commissioners had hoped that the two would find some way to work together without issuing subpoenas.

That turned out to not be the case, with the request from staff investigators for the subpoenas explaining that their inquiries have still gone unanswered.

The subpoenas seek clarity on the operations of the independent expenditure group A Stronger Alaska—which was funded solely with a $3 million contribution from the RGA before stronger disclosure laws went into effect.

They seek a complete list of people involved in A Stronger Alaska, a description of their roles, any communications between A Stronger Alaska and the Republican Governors Association, communications between A Stronger Alaska and Brett Huber and all bank statements of A Stronger Alaska.

This is one of two high-profile campaign finance complaints that have targeted A Stronger Alaska and the Republican Governors Association. The second complaint, which is still in the process of being reviewed after commissioners declined to take action ahead of the election, argues that the groups are essentially one in the same and that RGA should be directly exposed to the state's disclosure laws.

The Midnight Sun Memo by Matt Buxton is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Weekend watching

If you—like me—have only the vaguest understanding of crypto or the financial markets, the whole collapse of Tom Brady-endorsed FTX over the last two weeks has probably been about as confusing as, well, crypto and the financial markets. While there’s a load of great explainers out there to convert it to layman’s terms—like Planet Money’s explainer—I enjoyed this one from six months ago of guy pointing out that the FTX CEO’s explanation of his business model sounded a lot like a ponzi scheme.

Have a nice weekend and invest wisely.