PRESS RELEASE No Party Neil U.S. Senate Florida

PRESS RELEASE No Party Neil for U.S. Senate Florida (updated Jul-29-2026)

Hello Florida voters,

I am "No Party Neil", Neil J. Gillespie, a No Party Affiliation Candidate (NPA) for United States Senator for Florida in the general election set for November 3, 2026. President George Washington warned against political parties in his Farewell Address. Washington urged Americans to always place the interests of the nation over their political and regional affiliations. 

Florida is a closed primary state. Therefore, my name as a NPA candidate will not appear on the primary election ballot for the partisan primary election set for August 18, 2026. There are six candidates in the partisan primary election for U.S. Senate, 4 Republicans and 2 Democrats:

R: Chris Gleason; Ashley Moody; Neelam Perry; Ernie Rivera
D: Angie Nixon; Alex Vindman

On August 19, 2026, the day after the partisan primary election, I plan to officially launch my campaign. I believe this is a more effective strategy, against the general election candidates on November 3, 2026, rather than campaigning against 6 partisan primary candidates, where I am not even on the ballot!

The Florida Division of Elections emailed me on July 15, 2026 in response to my observation that Ballotpedia and Wikipedia claim this is a special election: 

Thank you for your message. This election will be a General election (not special) per s. 100.161 and 100.111(1)(a), Florida Statutes. 

There were more than 28 months remaining on Sen. Rubio’s vacated term and therefore Sen. Moody’s appointed term is only through the 2026 general election, at which a person will be elected to fill the remainder of Rubio’s term to 1/3/2029.  See Art. IV, s. 1 (f), Florida Constitution and 100.111(1)(a), Florida Statutes, which reads:

(1)(a) If any vacancy occurs in any office which is required to be filled pursuant to s. 1(f), Art. IV of the State Constitution and the remainder of the term of such office is 28 months or longer, then at the next general election a person shall be elected to fill the unexpired portion of such term, commencing on the first Tuesday after the first Monday following such general election.

The person elected at the 2028 election will put the terms back on track and that person will serve a full 6 years.

Therefore, if elected on November 3, 2026, I would be the incumbent candidate in 2028. 

On May 4, 2026, I gave notice to the Federal Election Commission that I suspended my 2028 campaign for president while I am running for United States Senator.    

There is an exception to the closed primary rule. An article by political consultant Jeff Carman of the Manatee Patriots explains The Florida State Representative Universal Primary Contest.  

"Florida is a Closed Primary state, which means that for a voter to choose the party nominee for a political party in a Partisan Elected race, the voter must be a registered voter of that political party to participate.

There are however opportunities for voters not registered as a Democrat or a Republican to vote.

They may vote in all Non-Partisan (at least in name) or no party affiliated races which under the Florida Constitution includes All Municipal City Council & Commission Races, County School Board Members (Presently) and almost all Judicial races from retention of Supreme Court members, Circuit and District Courts, County Judges and races like Soil and Water Conservation Board, Mosquito Control, Fire Districts, and Community Development Districts.

In rare instances, a scenario will come to fruition where all candidates that qualify in a partisan election are of ONE political party and no other candidates qualify that would appear on a ballot in the general election from another major political party or a write in candidate.

In this scenario, a Universal Primary Contest occurs. When all candidates for an office have the same party affiliation and the winner will have no opposition in the general election, all voters, regardless of party affiliation, will have the opportunity to vote in this race…"

Marion County, Florida has a Universal Primary Contest on August 18, 2026 for State Representative District 24 because the Democrat Party failed field a candidate. Ballotpedia reports, "The Democratic primary scheduled for August 18, 2026, was canceled."

The Republican Party has two candidates: Incumbent Rep. Ryan Chamberlin (R-Belleview) and a Republican candidate challenger, Scott Wilkins. The article by Jeffrey Carman is attached, along with my personal sample ballot showing the Universal Primary Contest scheduled for August 18, 2026 between Ryan Chamberlin and Scott Wilkins. The Marion County Supervisor of Elections provided my sample ballot.  

My responses to the 2026 Daytona Regional Chamber of Commerce voter guide questionnaire are posted here as a 2026 candidate for United States Senate for Florida.

Here are links to some of my online presence:

• Neil J. Gillespie for U.S. Senate

• Neil 2024

• Neil2028

• Justice Network blog

• Justice Network Facebook

• 2025 Federal Election Lawsuit: Mayor, City of Ocala, FL

Neil J. Gillespie, updated July 25, 2026

Paid for by Neil J. Gillespie for U.S. Senate, Committee ID: C00943399 
General George Washington. Image Credit: Creative Commons.

Notice to The Florida Bar: Anti-Weaponization Fund Federal Lawsuit

Notice to The Florida Bar: Anti-Weaponization Fund Federal Lawsuit

Mr. Joshua E. Doyle, Executive Director, The Florida Bar 
Cc: Mr. Richard Courtemanche, Deputy General Counsel, The Florida Bar 
Cc: Mr. Alejandro Brito, Bar # 98442

Dear Mr. Doyle:

It has come to my attention that Judge Kathleen William may have referred Florida attorney Alejandro Brito, Bar # 98442, to the Florida Bar for consideration on whether Brito should be disciplined in light of the findings in the new order in Trump v IRS, according to a post by David Oscar Markus on his SDFLA blog

In defense of Mr. Brito, and to offer myself as a substitute plaintiff-intervenor, I submit my response to the Federal Election Commission of June 25, 2025, which PDF is attached, and found on the FEC website, and my blog Neil 2028. Please note I have a claim against the IRS, and a claim against the State of Florida, the DeSantis administration, and the Biden administration, for lawfare involving Fla. Stat. sec. 934.03.  

NEIL J. GILLESPIE FOR PRESIDENT

WRITTEN OBJECTION to the Federal Election Commission, Administrative Termination of NEIL J. GILLESPIE FOR PRESIDENT Campaign Committee

See this part: 

"I plan to intervene in Trump v IRS, USDC, SDFL Case No. 1.26-cv-20609 (Anti-Weaponization Fund) U.S. Judge Kathleen Williams and Magistrate Judge Enjoliqué Lett presiding.

In Dunn v Trump et al, USCD, District of Columbia Case No. 1.26-cv-01719, U.S. Judge Richard Leon presiding, two Capital Policemen, Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges, sued over the Anti-Weaponization Fund. Officer Dunn and Officer Hodges have a right to know the FEC failed to act on a legitimate Complaint of Election Fraud in the 2020 Presidential Election.

Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges (photo added)

In Andrew Floyd v DOJ, USDC, Eastern Division Virginia, Case No. 1.26-cv-1399, Plaintiffs Andrew Floyd, Jonathan Caravello, City of New Haven, National Abortion Federation, and Common Cause, contend "The Department of Justice and the Department of Treasury have created a $1.776 billion slush fund—from taxpayer dollars—to dispense payment to those the Trump-Vance administration favors. Since its inception, this fund has been on a collision course with the United States Constitution." No. My complaint shows a lawyer admitted to practice law is an officer of the court, and a member of the judicial branch of government, and constitutionally prohibited from serving as vice president. That means J.D. Vance, as a lawyer admitted to practice, should be removed from office. U.S. Judge Leonie Brinkema and Magistrate Judge Ivan Davis are presiding.

In two other cases, Perkins Coie LLP v DOJ et al, DC Circuit Court of Appeal No. 25-5241, Trial Judge Beryl Howell; USDC, District of Columbia, Case No. 1:25-cv-00716-BAH, and American Bar Association (ABA) v Trump DOJ et al, DC Circuit Court of Appeal No. 25-5128 Trial Judge Amir H. Ali, USDC-District of Columbia Case No. 1.25-cv-01888, each of those cases argue separation of powers prevents President Trump from jurisdiction over lawyers and law firms. The ABA even cites the same case I rely upon: Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333 (1866).

The enclosed Transcript of the CBS News 60 Minutes episode with Scott Pelly, The Rule of Law, May 2, 2025, shows this quote by John Keker: 

"John Keker: We don't have to agree on politics but we do have to agree that the legal profession has to protect the rule of law in the United States. Which means lawyers and judges need to be independent from the executive branch. [Yes; see Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333 (1866)]"

This means the executive branch and the legislate branch also need to be independent of lawyers and judges. Ex parte Garland held that lawyers are governed by the judicial branch. But law firms are something different. The enclosed Affidavit of Kenneth L. Marvin of The Florida Bar shows the Bar only regulates lawyers, but not law firms. The affidavit is dated October 7, 2010, during the foreclosure crisis when "foreclosure mill" law firms were taking the homes of Americans without due process. The Florida Bar ignored wrongdoing by foreclosure mills on that basis. President Trump (as the executive) therefore has an oversight duty of law firms. Of course, law firms only want other lawyers to regulate them, lawyers admitted to practice like Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. The latter scheme offends the Constitution of the United States. 

I affirm that Neil J. Gillespie is my legal name. I have both court documents and drivers license that can attest to this. If there is any question, these documents will be provided for verification.

Neil J. Gillespie, Treasurer 
NEIL J. GILLESPIE FOR PRESIDENT, Id: C00627810
NEIL J GILLESPIE, Candidate ID: P60022993"

Perhaps President Trump can protect the citizens of Florida from lawfirms like Johnson Dalal and Morgan & Morgan, since The Florida Bar does not have jurisdiction. Also see,

Death of Sarah Thompson, age 35, May 12, 2021, City of Ocala, Marion County, Florida

DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT CASE 2020-CF-2417

Earlier today I provided you "cc" my email to Terri Parker, Investigative Reporter, WPBF 25 News, praising her excellent investigative reporting on the misuse of Florida's Security of Communications Act by the legal profession. The email is forwarded below. Thank you.

Sincerely,
/s/
Neil J. Gillespie (signature block edited) 
Neil J. Gillespie for US Senate
https://neilgillespie4senate.blogspot.com/
No Party Affiliation (NPA)
Florida Candidate ID: 89955
FEC Committee ID: C00943399
FEC Candidate ID: S6FL00863

UPDATE:  Florida Bar Opens Disciplinary Probe Into Trump's Attorney. Florida attorney Alejandro Brito, Bar # 98442.

Daily Business Review
Law.com July 23, 2026

The Florida Bar has opened a disciplinary file on President Donald Trump’s attorney Alejandro Brito after the federal judge overseeing the president's suit against the Internal Revenue Service referred him for discipline, the bar's communications director confirmed to Law.com Thursday.

"We can confirm that a file has been opened," Communications Director Jennifer Krell Davis wrote in a Thursday email.

Brito was referred to the bar by U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Florida Kathleen M. Williams as part of her scathing order in Trump v. IRS last week, which held the president brought the suit in an attempt to "manipulate the judicial process" and blocked the use of the $1.8 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" created to settle it.

"This lawsuit was not brought to vindicate rights; it was brought to manipulate the judicial process to pursue benefits unavailable in litigation because the parties were not adverse," Williams's July 13 order reads.

Brito did not immediately return Law.com’s request for comment Thursday afternoon.

Trump sued the IRS in January, alleging systemic failures allowed his confidential tax returns to be leaked and published. Williams closed the case in May after the parties voluntarily moved for its dismissal, announcing they’d entered a settlement agreement that shielded Trump from tax audits and set up a $1.776 billion fund for individuals who have "suffered weaponization and lawfare."

Williams's July 13 order blocks parties from using or referring to the fund. On top of the sanctions against Brito, acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche and associate U.S. Attorney General Stanley Woodward, Williams ordered that monetary sanctions be imposed.

Brito is representing Trump in many of the president's personal matters pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, including Trump's defamation suit against the British Broadcasting Corporation and his "debanking" claims against JPMorgan Chase Bank and CEO Jamie Dimon read more 

 Above The Law: The Trump Slush Fund Is Dead. Long Live The Trump Slush Fund.

Exclusive: Plaintiff has filed 160 lawsuits alleging website chats violated Florida wiretapping law

Exclusive: Plaintiff has filed 160 lawsuits alleging website chats violated Florida wiretapping law

WPBF 25 News
Terri Parker
Investigative Reporter
June 26, 2026

Fla. — A lawsuit against a Riviera Beach business over two questions asked through an artificial intelligence chatbot led to a much larger discovery.

WPBF 25 News Investigative reporter Terri Parker reviewed court records showing that since July 2025, attorneys representing Broward County plaintiff Yesenia Muniz have filed 160 lawsuits against businesses, alleging their website chatbots violated Florida's Security of Communications Act by recording customer conversations without first obtaining consent.

One of those businesses was Riviera Beach-based Boarderie, a company that ships charcuterie boards nationwide.

Owner Aaron Menitoff said he was stunned when his company was sued after Muniz allegedly used the company's AI chatbot to ask two questions about shipping.

"I was kind of blindsided," Menitoff told Parker. "I had heard these types of things happen, but when it happens to you, it makes your blood boil."

According to the lawsuit, Boarderie's AI chatbot illegally "intercepted" Muniz's online chat and stored it on a computer server without her consent, allegedly violating Florida's wiretapping law.

The lawsuit sought statutory damages of at least $2,500, plus attorney fees and court costs.

"Pot of gold for Professional Plaintiffs"

Menitoff's attorney, former Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg, argues the lawsuits attempt to apply a decades-old law to modern technology.

"It's not spying. It's not interception," Aronberg said. "When you have two parties to the conversation and one of them is the business itself, you can't spy on yourself."

Aronberg also questioned the volume of litigation.

"I don't think it's a good legal argument," he said. "Because there are statutory damages here and lawyer fees involved, it's a pot of gold for professional plaintiffs." Read more

 

Email July 13, 2026 to Terri Parker, Investigative Reporter, WPBF 25 News 

Dear Ms. Parker,

Thank you for your excellent reporting June 26, 2026 on the misuse of Florida's Security of Communications Act by the legal profession, including attorney Veronika Balbuzanova, attorney Abdul-Sumi Dalal, and the Johnson Dalal law firm. I am Neil J. Gillespie, a candidate for U.S. Senate. 

I was unable to locate the complaint in Muniz v. Cheeseboarder LLC, but I found a similar lawsuit filed by attorney Abdul-Sumi Dalal and the Johnson Dalal law firm, Yesenia Muniz v. Big Sandy Furniture, Inc. The complaint is attached. Please see paragraphs 16 and 17:

16. Chapter 934 was modeled after the Federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. section 2510 et seq., as amended by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986.

17. The FSCA prohibits any person or entity from intercepting, endeavoring to intercept, or procuring any third party to intercept or endeavor to intercept any electronic communication. Fla. Stat. § 934.03(1)(a). It is unlawful to intercept any electronic communication under Florida law "unless all of the parties to the communication have given prior consent to such interception" and to intentionally use or endeavor to use the contents of any electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of an electronic communication. Id. § 934.03(1)(d), (2)( d) (emphasis added).

Section 934 is the two-party consent rule in Florida. However federal law permits one-party consent, see 18 U.S.C. §2511(2)(d), "It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for a person not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication where such person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception unless such communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State." https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2511

You quoted attorney Dave Aronberg in your story: "What will happen is this will continue until enough people get hurt by this," Aronberg said. "Then the Legislature is going to act, and it's going to kill the golden goose."    

Actually the U.S. Congress (U.S. Senate and U.S. House) already acted, many years ago, see 18 U.S.C. §2511(2)(d). Under the Supremacy Clause, Section 934 is unconstitutional. "The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the United States (Article VI, Clause 2) establishes that the U.S. constitution, federal laws, and treaties override any state laws that conflict with them.[1] It promulgates that all state laws, state courts, and state constitutions are subordinate to the U.S. Constitution and federal laws and treaties made by the U.S. government.[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause

Federal law permits one-party consent to record calls [18 USC § 2511(2)(d)]. Last time I checked one party consent was the law in 38 states. Twelve states, including Florida, require two party consent. On its face, two party consent is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause

I believe Mr. Aronberg knows this because he is named in my court pleadings, see Wings4Sarah and Death of Sarah Thompson, age 35, May 12, 2021, City of Ocala, Marion County, Florida, and DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT CASE 2020-CF-2417

It appears Mr. Aronberg may not have advised his client, Aaron Menitoff, about this issue.

Also, if the parties sued by attorney Veronika Balbuzanova, attorney Abdul-Sumi Dalal, and the Johnson Dalal law firm, actually violated section 934.03, why were they not arrested? I was arrested twice under section 934.03. Mr. Aronberg, as a former State Attorney, knows people have been arrested under section 934.03.

This is one reason I am running for U.S. Senate. Section 934 is unconstitutional, but is being used by the Florida legal profession to extort money from people like Aaron Mentitoff, and his company Cheeseboarder LLC. Section 934 is also being used as lawfare to arrest people like me.

I profiled your report on my Telephone Recording page. 
https://www.nosue.org/telephone-recording/

I plan a filing in federal court by the end of the week. Thanks again for your reporting. 

Sincerely,
/s/
Neil J. Gillespie (signature block edited)
Neil J. Gillespie for US Senate
https://neilgillespie4senate.blogspot.com/
No Party Affiliation (NPA)
Florida Candidate ID: 89955
FEC Committee ID: C00943399
FEC Candidate ID: S6FL00863