Trump-appointed judge threatens Mike Lindell with 'further contempt sanctions
Source: Law & Crime
Jan 6th, 2026, 11:25 am
A federal judge for the second time in the last three months has questions about why 2020 election conspiracy theorist and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell has failed to comply with a court order, raising the specter of "further contempt sanctions."
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols is a Donald Trump appointee who has presided over Dominion Voting Systems-related defamation lawsuits since the aftermath of the 2020 election.
One year ago, Nichols ordered Lindell to pay more than $50,000 to Smartmatic, a now-indicted voting machine company whose technology was used only in Los Angeles County in 2020. Smartmatic became involved in the Dominion case as a third-party defendant because Lindell countersued, claiming RICO violations. Some "frivolous" claims in the Lindell countersuit led Nichols to order up $56,369 in sanctions.
In March, Smartmatic moved to hold Lindell in civil contempt, complaining that he "still has not paid, nor [
] meaningfully engaged in any discussions or negotiations regarding the terms of payment."
Read more: https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/trump-appointed-judge-threatens-mike-lindell-with-further-contempt-sanctions-orders-mypillow-ceo-to-explain-why-he-has-still-not-complied/
Full headline: Trump-appointed judge threatens Mike Lindell with 'further contempt sanctions,' orders MyPillow CEO to explain why he 'has still not complied'
Link to MINUTE ORDER - https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59670901/us-dominion-inc-v-my-pillow-inc/?page=3#minute-entry-449282005
LiberalLovinLug
(14,584 posts)"further contempt sanctions" what does that even mean? Its been 5 years ffs! Its not even that much. Make him pay or throw him in jail.
What ever happened to the 5 million he was supposed to pay for his dumb bet about 2020 being stolen?
BumRushDaShow
(165,898 posts)An appellate court voided it this past summer - Mike Lindell celebrates victory after appeals court voids $5M award in election data dispute