Article By David Lindfield
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) released a scathing new report accusing former special counsel Jack Smith and the Biden administration of trampling constitutional protections, secretly collecting lawmakers’ phone records, and attempting to sway the 2024 election against President Donald Trump.
The 57-page report argues that Smith’s team “ran roughshod over key constitutional protections” while the Biden White House wielded “the DOJ as a weapon against its political opponents.”
“The Special Counsel’s prosecutors tried to silence President Trump with unlawful gag orders, threatened defense attorneys, mishandled key documents, and broke protocol to release a massive trove of alleged evidence just weeks before the presidential election to sway public opinion,” the report states.
Republicans say investigators gathered information about the text messages of as many as 44 House and Senate members, only two of whom were Democrats.
Jordan’s report alleges that prosecutors deliberately skirted constitutional safeguards and kept lawmakers from discovering the surveillance through secrecy orders.
NEW REPORT: How Jack Smith and the Biden-Harris DOJ Disregarded the Separation of Powers to Spy on their Political Opposition
— House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryGOP) September 23, 2026
Jack Smith knew Members of Congress are protected by the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause.
Smith's own team even concluded that the subpoenas…
DOJ Officials Warned Subpoenas Could Be Unconstitutional
The report says investigators working on the probe known as “Arctic Frost,” followed by Smith’s team, held only limited discussions with the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section about the constitutionality of seizing lawmakers’ records.
“Internal documents show that Arctic Frost investigators, and later Smith’s team, had only limited, perfunctory discussions with subject-matter experts in DOJ’s Public Integrity Section (PIN) about the constitutionality of these seizures,” the report states.
“Although PIN cautioned that the subpoenas could be unconstitutional, PIN approved them nonetheless, asserting there was little ‘litigation risk’ because the gag orders that accompanied the subpoenas would prevent Members from ever discovering the seizures.
“As a result, Members of Congress were unaware of the Biden-Harris DOJ’s spying for more than two years.”
Investigators also sought Jordan’s phone records from August 2020 through January 2021 as part of the federal investigation involving Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA).
The Public Integrity Section argued that the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause did not protect Jordan because investigators targeted personal cellphone accounts and served the subpoenas on his carrier rather than on him directly.
An email excerpt showed that PIN Deputy Chief Jennifer Clarke acknowledged a “litigation risk” but “approved the subpoenas nonetheless,” according to the report.
Another official, John Keller, described the legal risk associated with obtaining lawmakers’ call records as “minimal” because those members were unlikely to face federal charges.
Keller also argued that the government had a “potentially meritorious argument that the calls over the relevant period, especially unsolicited incoming calls, would not constitute protected legislative acts.”
DOJ Sought More Than Two Years of Jordan’s Calls
The report alleges that the Justice Department improperly enlisted its supposedly independent inspector general’s office to serve a sweeping subpoena seeking records of every call Jordan made or received over more than two years.
“On May 1, the DOJ issued a subpoena for Chairman Jordan’s phone records from January 1, 2020, to April 25, 2022—every call incoming and outgoing for more than two years.43 A Special Agent from the DOJ Office of the Inspector General (OIG)—an entity that should be independent of the DOJ and maintain a reporting relationship with Congress as it investigates waste, fraud, and abuse—served the subpoena to Chairman Jordan’s phone carrier,” the report states.
OIG Special Agent Brian Burnett testified that the arrangement was “unique” during his three decades in law enforcement because prosecutors were directing his investigative actions.
“A normal investigation would be, I would do the investigation, become familiar with everything, you know, do grand jury subpoenas, do the normal investigative process, follow the normal investigative steps,” Burnett testified.
“But, in this case, those steps were given to us by the prosecution team.”
Jordan’s report also says prosecutors bypassed a Justice Department “filter team” designed to protect privileged material while obtaining records belonging to lawmakers and Trump officials.
Smith Team Abandoned Subpoenas After AT&T Objected
Smith’s team abandoned grand jury subpoenas seeking two other lawmakers’ phone records after AT&T questioned the legal justification, according to a letter included in the report.
“In May 2023, Special Counsel Smith sent AT&T a grand jury subpoena that included a request for phone records associated with AT&T accounts for two other members of Congress,” the letter states.
“However, when AT&T raised questions with … Special Counsel Smith’s office concerning the legal basis for seeking records of members of Congress, the Special Counsel did not pursue the subpoena further, and no records were produced.”
When congressional investigators questioned Smith about the episode, he said he did not “have any recollection of that.”
The report further alleges that Smith “admitted privately” to then-Attorney General Merrick Garland that lawmakers “likely have a valid Speech or Debate privilege immunizing them from compelled testimony.”
Despite that warning, Garland gave his “blessing” to subpoenas “compelling the production of Members’ protected legislative records,” the report alleges.
Jordan Demands New Protections Against Executive Surveillance
Jordan urged the House to pass the Congressional Records Protection Act, introduced by Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA).
The legislation would prohibit government entities from obtaining records through subpoenas, warrants, court orders, or other means when those records are likely to implicate the Speech or Debate Clause.
The Judiciary Committee advanced the bill, but House leaders have not brought it to the floor for a vote.
“The Speech or Debate Clause protects not only legislators, but American citizens too,” the report states.
“It guarantees that the people’s representatives in Congress may advocate effectively on their constituents’ behalf without the threat of interference or intimidation by the Executive Branch.”
Smith Blames Trump for Surveillance of Republicans
Smith continues to defend his investigation and denies Republican accusations of misconduct.
During testimony before congressional investigators, the former special counsel blamed Trump for his team’s decision to collect Republican lawmakers’ records.
“I think who should be accountable for this is Donald Trump,” Smith said.
“These records are people; in the case of the Senators, Donald Trump directed his co-conspirators to call these people to further delay the proceedings.
“He chose to do that.
“If Donald Trump had chosen to call a number of Democratic Senators, we would have gotten toll records for Democratic Senators.
“So responsibility for why these records, why we collected them…that lies with Donald Trump.”
Be the first to comment