Why aren't Mueller's indictments challenged as unconstitutional? I don't know why the attorneys representing the reported 37 people indicted by Special Counsel Mueller haven't challenged the law on behalf of their clients, considering the illegal FISA warrant.  Under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court has enunciated the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine, first in Nardone v. United States (1939) and later applied it in other cases, such as Mapp v. Ohio.  It generally holds that evidence that is the direct result or immediate product of illegal conduct on the part of an official is inadmissible in a criminal trial against the victim of the conduct or other person with standing. Having stated that, as a long retired law enforcement officer in police and corrections, I recollect from my training and academy classes that if a warrant was false or tainted, all of the charges brought against someone would be thrown out under the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine. https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/04/why_arent_muellers_indictments_challenged_as_unconstitutional.html#ixzz5kKbPuB8a