A federal appeals court ruled in favor of Mike Lindell, overturning a $5 million award to software engineer Robert Zeidman in a dispute over election data, leading Lindell to celebrate the decision as a victory for his claims of election fraud while Zeidman’s attorney criticized the ruling’s implications for justice.

In a significant legal development, a federal appeals court ruled on July 23, 2025, that Mike Lindell, the founder of MyPillow and a prominent figure in the election fraud narrative, will not be required to pay a $5 million award to software engineer Robert Zeidman.

This ruling by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals centers on a contentious dispute regarding data that Lindell claims demonstrates interference by China in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

The case traces back to Lindell’s “Prove Mike Wrong Challenge,” which he launched during a “Cyber Symposium” in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, in 2021.

At that event, Lindell offered a $5 million prize to anyone who could prove that the data he presented—specifically “packet captures”—was not valid data from the election.

Zeidman, who took up the challenge, submitted a detailed 15-page report asserting that Lindell’s data was misrepresented.

However, when contest judges declined to declare Zeidman as the winner, he sought arbitration under the contest’s rules.

Initially, an arbitration panel, which included one arbitrator chosen by Lindell himself, ruled in favor of Zeidman, awarding him the $5 million.

This decision was later upheld by U.S. District Judge John Tunheim, who noted the ambiguity in the contest rules but stated that courts have limited authority to overturn arbitration awards.

Tunheim’s ruling indicated concern over the arbitration panel’s interpretation of what he described as a “poorly written contract.”

Lindell, however, maintained his stance, claiming this was a significant victory for him and his supporters. “It’s a great day for our country,” he exclaimed in a post-ruling interview.

“This is a big win. It opens the door to getting rid of these electronic voting machines and getting paper ballots, hand-counted.” His comments reflect his ongoing campaign against electronic voting systems, which he argues are susceptible to fraud.

The appeals court’s recent ruling indicates that the arbitration panel overstepped its authority, suggesting that the panel had modified the terms of the contest rather than adhering strictly to the documented rules.

The court stated, “Whatever one might think of the logic of the panel’s reasoning, it is contrary to Minnesota law. …

Fair or not, agreed-to contract terms may not be modified by the panel or by this court.” This decision has sent the case back to the lower court with instructions to vacate the $5 million award, a move that Lindell and his supporters view as a validation of their claims.

In contrast, Zeidman’s attorney, Brian Glasser, expressed disappointment with the appeals court’s ruling, urging the public to review the arbitrators’ decision and assess its validity against the 8th Circuit’s findings.

“Judge for yourselves if the Eight Circuit’s decision today is more persuasive or rings in truth louder than the unanimous contrary decision of three arbitrators who heard all the evidence,” Glasser stated.

This legal battle is just one chapter in Lindell’s ongoing saga, as he has faced numerous challenges related to his claims of election fraud.

Notably, he recently lost a separate defamation case in Colorado, where a jury awarded $2.3 million in damages to a former employee of a voting equipment company whom Lindell accused of treason.

Despite this setback, Lindell continues to assert that he will appeal the verdict, emphasizing that MyPillow itself was not found liable.

The ruling has reignited discussions about the integrity of the 2020 presidential election, a topic that has been fraught with controversy and division.

Lindell remains one of the most vocal proponents of the theory that widespread fraud occurred during the election, despite numerous court cases and investigations that have consistently found no evidence to support such claims.

His ongoing efforts to challenge the election results have drawn both fervent supporters and staunch critics.

As the legal landscape continues to evolve, Lindell’s recent victory in the appeals court not only underscores the complexities of arbitration in legal disputes but also highlights the enduring debate over election integrity in America.

With the implications of this ruling still unfolding, many are left wondering what the future holds for Lindell, his claims, and the broader narrative surrounding the 2020 election.