In the case of <a href="https://www.adn.com/politics/2026/06/15/alaska-formally-disqualifies-namesake-challenger-to-sen-dan-sullivan-from-appearing-on-the-ballot/" target="_blank" rel="" title="https://www.adn.com/politics/2026/06/15/alaska-formally-disqualifies-namesake-challenger-to-sen-dan-sullivan-from-appearing-on-the-ballot/">Sullivan versus Sullivan</a>, even assuming it is a dirty trick, which is by no means obvious, it seems increasingly acceptable for one party to use procedural tricks to <a href="https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-132/the-supreme-courts-legitimacy-dilemma/" target="_blank" rel="" title="https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-132/the-supreme-courts-legitimacy-dilemma/">avoid confirming</a> an otherwise highly qualified Supreme Court nomination; <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/08/28/redistricting-between-censuses-has-been-rare-in-the-modern-era/" target="_blank" rel="" title="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/08/28/redistricting-between-censuses-has-been-rare-in-the-modern-era/">gerrymander</a> between 10-year census intervals; prosecute perceived <a href="https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-prosecutions-visual-guide-ef488d01" target="_blank" rel="" title="https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-prosecutions-visual-guide-ef488d01">political enemies</a>; financially <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/17/january-6-defendants-compensation-process" target="_blank" rel="" title="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/17/january-6-defendants-compensation-process">reward convicted rioters</a> and absolve the seditious incitement of that riot; and so on. But heaven forbid the other party even show the mere possibility of having committed a dirty trick. It appears we have a bit of a double standard.