In State v. Galvin, 491 P.3d 325 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court held that when a preliminary injunction threatens the success of an election it should be denied to protect the public interest. (Id. at 339–40). Prior to the November 2020 general election, the Division of Elections (the Division) made the decision to omit voter registration information from the ballot. (Id. at 329). The Division did not notify the public of this decision until September 14, 2020, when it listed a sample ballot on its website. (Id. at 330). Galvin had won the Democratic Party nomination but was registered as a nonpartisan voter. (Id. at 328). When she learned of the new ballot design, she filed suit alleging that the ballot design violated a statutory provision as well as her right of political association under the Alaska Constitution. (Id. at 330). Galvin appealed the superior court’s decision to deny a preliminary injunction and argued that the Division could be adequately protected against harm caused by an injunction and that she had demonstrated probably success on the merits of her claims. (Id. at 331). While the court determined that Galvin faced irreparable harm if her claims were correct, the court affirmed the superior court’s conclusion that an injunction could possibly prevent a timely election and the Division could not be adequately protected from harm. (Id. at 333–34). While the court determined Galvin did not show a clear probability of success on the merits of her constitutional arguments, it declined to make a determination on her statutory claim. (Id. at 336–38). Instead, the court concluded that granting an injunction would imperil the public interest based on the superior court’s factual finding that an injunction would make a timely, successful election difficult. (Id. at 339). The supreme court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that when a preliminary injunction threatens the success of an election it must be denied to protect the public interest. (Id. at 339–40).