The US Supreme Court has denied a petition by MyPillow founder and election denier Mike Lindell. The court declined to consider his challenge to the legality of the FBI’s seizure of his cellphone at a restaurant drive-through in 2022. The high court, without comment on Monday, April 15, 2024, declined to reconsider three lower court rulings.
Notably, the rulings went against Lindell, a prominent election denier who claimed Democrats manipulated voting machines during the 2020 presidential election.
FBI agents seized the cellphone from Lindell at a Hardee’s fast-food restaurant in the southern Minnesota city of Mankato in 2022. The seizure happened in an investigation into an alleged scheme to breach voting system technology in Mesa County, Colorado.
When the incident occurred, the MyPillow CEO was reportedly on his way home from a duck hunting trip. Afterward, Lindell alleged the confiscation violated his constitutional rights against unlawful search and seizure. Also, he claimed it was an attempt by the government to chill his freedom of speech.
ALSO READ: Mike Lindell Says Firm Is in Great Shape Amid MyPillow Court-Ordered Eviction From Warehouse
However, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed. “While he has at times attempted to assert otherwise, Lindell’s objective in this action is apparent,” a three-judge appeals panel wrote last September. “This litigation is a tactic to, at a minimum, interfere with and, at most, enjoin a criminal investigation.”
The appeals panel added, “And ultimately hamper any potential federal prosecution.” Also, Judge Ralph Erickson of the St. Louis-based 8th Circuit Court of Appeal ruled against his constitutional claim. “Lindell’s irritation as to where and how the government took possession of his cell phone,” Erickson wrote.
“Does not give rise to a constitutional claim, let alone a showing of a callous disregard for his constitutional rights.” Furthermore, the FBI questioned Mike Lindell about Tina Peters, the Mesa County clerk in Colorado who was indicted in 2022.
POLL—Should the Government Increase Taxes on the Wealthy To Reduce Economic Inequality?
Peters allegedly improperly permitted someone to copy access passwords and other files from a secure voting system. The person then posted the files online, exposing the machines to hackers. However, Peters has argued that the files posted online from the machines she supervised demonstrated system flaws.
Notably, Peters and Mike Lindell, supporters of former President Donald Trump, pushed baseless lies about the 2020 election. Following the court of appeals ruling, Lindell and his attorneys turned to the Supreme Court.
In February, Lindell and his attorneys told the high court the FBI had still not returned his phone back. However, as stated earlier, the court rejected his petition. Monday’s decision was the latest in a run of legal and financial setbacks for Mike Lindell.
ALSO READ: Legal Experts Say Mike Lindell’s New Supreme Court Evidence Is Bound to Fail
After the 2020 elections, two voting machine companies sued the MyPillow CEO for defamation by two voting machine companies. Lawyers who initially defended him quit over unpaid bills. A credit crunch disrupted the cash flow at MyPillow after it lost Fox News as one of its major advertising platforms.
Also, several national retailers dropped the company. In February, a judge affirmed a $5 million arbitration award to a software engineer. According to court documents, the engineer challenged data Lindell said proves China interfered in the 2020 election.
After the Supreme Court rejected his appeal on Monday, Mike Lindell accused the government of retaliation. He said the government retaliated against “those who persist in questioning the integrity of computerized voting systems.” Particularly those used in the 2020 election.
You Might Also Like:
9-Year-Old Killed in Mass Shooting at Family Gathering
Democrats Plot Dismissal As Senate Begins Mayorkas Impeachment Trial
Police Discover “1923” Actor Cole Brings Plenty Dead
5 Tips On How to Maximize Your Chances of Losing Weight and Keeping It Off
Arizona Supreme Court Enforces Near-Total Ban, Revives 160-Year-Old Law