Mike Lindell campaign says he is withholding required payment for Minnesota GOP governor primary recount

Mike Lindell is withholding payment for a recount and ballot audit requested for the Minnesota Republican governor primary, according to a statement released by his campaign Monday. Lindell said the Minnesota Secretary of State’s office has proposed what he described as an unlawful recount process, prompting his refusal to provide the payment that would allow the recount and audit to proceed under the state’s requirements.

Lindell’s campaign framed the dispute as a process question rather than an effort to block vote tabulation outright. The campaign said it is contesting the structure of the procedure the Secretary of State’s office would use for the recount and audit, and it linked that objection to the payment step necessary to initiate the requested review.

The filing and administrative steps for election recounts vary by state and can depend on whether a recount is sought by a candidate, a political party, or another authorized party, as well as on deadlines and fees set by law or regulation. In this case, Lindell’s campaign portrayed the Secretary of State’s proposal as inconsistent with the requirements that govern recount and audit procedures in Minnesota.

Minnesota’s election administration is handled by the Secretary of State, which oversees state-level processes including the certification of election results and certain election administration steps. The recount and audit dispute between Lindell’s campaign and the Secretary of State’s office centers on how a recount would be carried out once a request is made and what conditions apply to moving forward.

CBS News reported that Lindell’s campaign said the payment is being withheld while the legal challenge over the recount method plays out. As a result, the practical effect could be to delay any ballot recount and audit for the Republican governor primary unless the process objection is resolved or the payment issue changes.

Election administration disputes of this kind can become time-sensitive, especially when results affect deadlines for subsequent election activities. If the recount or audit cannot proceed, the certification timeline and any downstream actions tied to the primary outcome could become a focal point for both parties and election officials.

The campaign statement does not, in the CBS report, provide additional details about the specific recount mechanics at issue or the legal basis for the claim of unlawfulness. It also does not indicate whether Lindell’s team is pursuing a court challenge or another formal review of the Secretary of State’s proposed approach.

It remains unclear from the reporting what next steps the Secretary of State’s office plans to take in response to the withheld payment, or whether the sides will resolve the dispute through an adjustment to the procedure, a payment after clarification, or litigation over the recount and audit framework. Any such resolution would determine whether the requested recount and audit can proceed and on what terms.