The Illinois man who made headlines when he was detained for parodying the town's mayor on Twitter sued the Peoria politician and local police, claiming on Thursday that his civil rights were violated.

As part of the April raid, the authorities seized the mobile phone and laptop of the 29-year-old prankster, Jonathan Daniel, and reviewed their contents, which he says was in violation of his First Amendment rights. According to the suit (PDF) lodged in Illinois federal court:

From March 9 through March 19, 2014, Mr. Daniel tweeted from a Twitter account, @peoriamayor, which used a picture of Jim Ardis (“Ardis”), the mayor of Peoria, as the account’s avatar. Displeased with the content of the tweets, Defendants embarked on a plan to shut down the account and identify and punish its creator in violation of his constitutional rights. As part of Defendants’ plan, Peoria Police Department officers searched Mr. Daniel’s residence, seized his personal property, reviewed personal information on Mr. Daniel’s electronic devices and in his mail, and arrested, detained, and interrogated Mr. Daniel purportedly for the crime of false personation of a public official.

Daniel, the operator of the @peoriamayor handle shut down by Twitter after the city threatened a lawsuit, was initially accused of impersonating a public official in violation of Illinois law. The authorities never lodged charges, however.

"Illinois' provision for false personation of a public official criminalizes only representations made in person. Illinois courts require as an element of the offense that there be an intent to deceive the public that the impersonator is acting in the official capacity of a public official. Application of Illinois’ provision for false personation of a public official to speech made without such an intent violates the First Amendment and Article I, Section 4 of the Illinois State Constitution," according to the suit.

The raid was set in motion after the mayor, Jim Ardis, told police that he was upset over being falsely portrayed as a drug abuser , according to court documents.

The raid resulted in marijuana drug-possession charges against Daniel's roommate.

According to a search warrant application, Peoria Mayor Jim Ardis was concerned that the tweets in the account impersonating him implied that the mayor "utilizes illegal drugs, associates with prostitutes, and utilized offensive inappropriate language."

One tweet the mayor complained to the authorities about read: "...Who stole my crackpipe?"

Another tweet mentioned in an application for the search warrant said, "I'm up all night woke up with pussy on my breath and bloodshot eyes and we got people talking bout live tweeting? Let me do my job u do urs." Still another tweet said, "If you don't like Peoria and u wanna sit here and bitch about den leave."

A picture on the account, according to the warrant, was of a "hand holding a razor blade which was separating a white powdery substance."

Peoria Police Chief Steve Settingsgaard, who has subsequently resigned but is named in the suit, said in the immediate aftermath of the raid that the department was investigating misdemeanor charges of impersonating a public official, which carries a maximum one-year jail term and $2,500 fine.

The authorities obtained the location of the house to raid after Twitter complied with a warrant and supplied account information, as did Comcast with an IP address.

Jacob Elliot, whose name was on the Comcast account, faces felony marijuana charges for allegedly possessing 30 to 500 grams of marijuana. He has been suspended from his job of 14 years, too, after several armed officers wearing bulletproof vests stormed the residence.

The suit said the account was a "satiric form of expression protected by the First Amendment and the Illinois Constitution. The Twitter account was not reasonably believable as conveying the voice or message of the actual mayor. Mr. Daniel had no intention of deceiving people into believing the account was actually operated by a representative of the mayor or the mayor himself, and no reasonable person could conclude such an intent from the content of the tweets or the Twitter account’s profile page."