[2] When he filed the suit, Miller also sought a preliminary injunction requesting a suspension of the hand count of all the write-in votes pending a final order of the federal court.

Miller appealed the ruling to the Alaska Supreme Court; they heard oral arguments on December 17 and have fast-tracked their decision-making.

When Alaska's state Division of Elections announced that it would consider voter intent when reviewing the write-in ballots, Miller sued to prevent the counting of ballots that did not perfectly spell Murkowski's last name, or that did not reproduce her name exactly as it was stated on Murkowski's declaration of write-in candidacy, or that had penmanship issues.

On November 19, the court ruled against Miller's request for a preliminary injunction to immediately stop the write-in vote count, but allowed the lawsuit to continue.

[14] After filing the federal lawsuit, Miller began a second legal action against Alaska election officials, this time, in State court, asking to inspect and count signatures of voters in more than 30 precincts.

[15] In support of the suit, Miller provided affidavits that cited, among other things, a ballot box that was not secured, and signatures that appeared similar.

The Associated Press noted that similar signatures could be caused by voters requesting and receiving aid in filling out ballots, and that the affidavits suggesting fraud had been mostly by Miller supporters.

[16] Miller then filed his second State case in Fairbanks where he lives, essentially repeating the allegations in his federal lawsuit Complaint, but adding new claims of vote fraud and bias.

Miller's campaign replied that Carey's ruling modifies State law, and renewed calls for a hand count of all the ballots cast in the election.

The State of Alaska spent an estimated $100,000 defending itself from these suits, and pursued partial compensation from Miller, as well as proposing new voting rules regarding write-ins in order to prevent a recurrence.