President Biden: The NEW one and only politics thread

Can someone who knows the law better explain this to me?

So a grand jury subpoena's Mike Lindell's phone. ... The FBI shows up and serves the subpoena. Can the FBI legally seize the phone at that point the way they did (if you believe Lindell, a big if, I know)?

Doesn't there have to be room in there for the person who was served the subpoena to challenge it --either claim that it is unreasonable or that the scope of it should be narrowed -- before they comply?

Otherwise if it went down the way Lindell is saying, how isn't this a fourth amendment violation? The government basically came and grabbed his phone without a warrant / judge / any due process being involved?

Something about the way he is saying it happened doesn't seem right to me.

 

Thanks. This is still really confusing me. That story is seemlessly talking about a grand jury subpoena and a warrant authorized by a Federal judge. It doesn't add up. Is there a grand jury investigation going on at the same time that prosecutors went before a judge, and there was a subpoena that has nothing to do with the warrant? Or is it one or the other? Or is it that a subpoena duces tecum somehow got accompanied by a search warrant, and if so, why and how does that work?

 

What does that have to do with a grand jury subpoena for the phone?

 

Thx. I understand that. ... a search warrant and they can grab whatever it covers. But did the judge sign the warrant independently of a supposed grand jury subpoena, or is it related? That is what is confusing me. Because if it is related to a grand jury subpoena, don't you get a chance first to challenge the subpoena as unreasonable?