In his quest to retrieve his seized cell phone, the MyPillow CEO, whose phone was famously taken by the FBI at a Hardee’s drive-thru while returning from a duck hunting trip in 2022, has escalated his legal battle to the Supreme Court of the United States. Despite his previous unsuccessful attempts, he is determined to reclaim his device.
Mike Lindell recently made an intriguing announcement, suggesting that a significant case is on its way to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). He confidently predicted that this case would result in a unanimous decision of 9-0 in his favor, drawing parallels to a recent ruling where the justices unanimously voted to keep Donald Trump on the ballot.
Related Coverage:
When Lindell made these remarks, it was unclear whether he was referring to a case involving his phone or another case. However, based on the timeline, it is now more likely that he was discussing a case related to U.S. Senate candidate Kari Lake and her unsuccessful attempt to eliminate voting machines. According to reports, Lindell informed Steve Bannon just last weekend that a significant announcement would be made on the steps of the Supreme Court by Friday at 3 p.m. He emphasized that this case was not a mere conspiracy theory, but rather a substantial matter concerning voting machines.
Lindell has indeed filed a petition of a writ of certiorari regarding his phone.
The petition, which was filed on February 26, did not prompt an immediate response from the Biden administration, according to the docket. On March 13, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar explicitly waived the right to respond to the petition unless specifically requested to do so by SCOTUS.
The Lindell petition paints a picture of him as a victim of government persecution, all because he dared to question the integrity of elections and voting machines.
The Government is being accused of attempting to retaliate against those who continue to question the reliability of computerized voting systems, specifically those used in the 2020 election. The case highlights the Government’s misuse of power in its pursuit to identify individuals who challenge election outcomes and the strategies they employ. The petition argues that the Government has reviewed privileged communications found on Lindell’s seized cell phone, which include discussions among individuals, including Lindell himself, who have joined forces with the common goal of safeguarding election integrity. What is even more concerning is that the federal courts have disregarded several established precedents in approving the Government’s actions against Lindell and his associates. This, according to Lindell, has resulted in the violation of his First and Fourth Amendment rights.
In his impassioned plea, Lindell strongly criticized the concept of “lawfare” and condemned the manipulation of the judicial process. He urged the justices to intervene and restore the integrity of the rule of law.
The high court was asked to address two crucial questions:
1. Whether a preliminary injunction may be granted if it requests the ultimate relief sought in the litigation.
2. Whether a warrant is invalid for failure to comply with the particularity requirement of the Fourth Amendment where the warrant authorizes the seizure of all electronic data stored on a cell phone without particularly describing the data to be seized.
After the FBI seized Lindell’s phone due to an identity theft, intentional damage to a protected computer, and conspiracy warrant, it was revealed that the pillow salesman and former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters, who has since been indicted at the state level in Colorado, were “subjects” of the federal probe.
Lindell, along with the assistance of attorney Alan Dershowitz, countered by initiating a lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland. However, their efforts proved unsuccessful in the district court.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit dismissed the arguments in favor of returning the phone. A panel of judges, all appointed by Republican presidents, concluded that the seizure of the device did not violate the constitution or demonstrate a disregard for constitutional rights. The panel pointed out that Lindell himself admitted in a sworn declaration that his phone had been backed up five days before it was seized. Therefore, the panel determined that being annoyed about how and where the government took possession of his cell phone does not give rise to a constitutional claim.
Now, despite facing billion-dollar defamation lawsuits from Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic, Lindell and his company, MyPillow, are urging the Supreme Court to finally resolve the phone dispute. They firmly believe that the court’s intervention is necessary, especially considering their ongoing legal battles related to their claims about the 2020 election being stolen from Trump.
Read More:
- Mom Gives Funny Reason Her Son Isn’t Allowed to Practice Recorder at Home
- After an unsettling discovery, the bride calls off the wedding, but she finds a lovely way to save the day!
