Michael J. Lindell, et al. v. United States, et al.

The extraordinary number of conclusions in the opinion below that conflict starkly with applicable precedents smacks of a judicial process that strains to reach a result based on the identity of the parties rather than the rule of law. The maneuvers of the Eighth Circuit to evade the governing precedents that protect Lindell’s First and Fourth Amendment rights have produced a decision crafted to apply only to Lindell, unanchored to the well-established legal principles that safeguard the rights of everyone else. The case presents the following 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.