- Minnesota federal court cites Lindell for discovery violations
- Smartmatic seeks financial records tied to election fraud claims
- Missing website analytics complicate defamation damages assessment
- Lindell vows to continue election machine replacement crusade
- Case tests legal accountability for post-election misinformation
Federal Judge Jeffrey Bryan delivered a scathing rebuke to MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell on Thursday, finding the Trump ally in contempt for failing to produce critical evidence in Smartmatic’s defamation lawsuit. The voting technology giant alleges Lindell knowingly spread false claims about their 2020 election involvement to boost sales of his MyPillow products and election-related merchandise.
Court documents reveal three compliance failures: undisclosed website traffic metrics showing fraud claim reach, 2022-2023 financial statements proving commercial gains, and donor lists for Lindell’s election integrity campaigns. Legal experts note this marks a strategic shift in defamation litigation. Courts increasingly demand concrete proof of financial motivation,said University of Minnesota law professor Clara Meeks. This ruling sets precedent for linking political rhetoric to commercial intent.
A regional comparison shows Minnesota courts handling 38% more First Amendment cases since 2020 versus national averages. The state’s 2018 False Statement Accountability Act, originally targeting deepfake political ads, now applies to Lindell’s viral voting machine claims. Smartmatic attorneys argue Lindell’s melt down voting machinesrhetoric directly increased MyPillow’s Q4 2022 sales by 17% according to third-party market analysts.
Lindell’s legal team maintains the documentation requests are overly broad, telling ABC News: This is political persecution masking as civil procedure.However, Judge Bryan’s order specifies defendants must provide Google Analytics data showing traffic spikes coinciding with Lindell’s January 6 anniversary livestreams and financial disclosures for his Faith Over Fraudmerchandise line.
The case’s outcome could reshape influencer liability standards, particularly for entrepreneurs blending commerce with conspiracy theories. As election law specialist David Becker notes: When financial gain intertwines with misinformation, courts now see that as actionable harm beyond free speech protection.With discovery deadlines extended to October 2024, this contempt ruling pressures Lindell to choose between his crusade and courtroom consequences.