House weighs criminal referral of Jack Smith over allegations he misled Congress about lawmakers' text messages

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan said Wednesday that Congress is actively considering a criminal referral of former special counsel Jack Smith to the Justice Department, after newly released records indicated Smith's team obtained and reviewed private text messages from 44 current and former members of Congress, and that Smith may have lied about it under oath.

Jordan made the announcement on Fox News' "Hannity," telling host Sean Hannity that the committee is examining whether Smith's sworn testimony before the panel contradicts what DOJ records now show.

"Do we need to refer him to the Justice Department, to [Attorney General Blanche], for them to go ahead and move forward with prosecution? We're looking at that as we speak."

The disclosure has set off a firestorm on Capitol Hill. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley announced Tuesday that records provided to his committee confirmed Smith's investigative team reviewed the contents of text messages sent by 44 lawmakers, 40 Republicans and four Democrats, during the Trump election probe. The messages were exchanged between Trump White House personnel and members of Congress between October 2020 and January 20, 2021, and were obtained via subpoena to the National Archives.

The problem is not just that the messages were collected. It's what Smith told Congress about them.

What Smith said under oath

On December 17, 2025, Smith sat for a closed-door deposition before the House Judiciary Committee in Washington. His testimony, now under intense scrutiny, included specific denials about the scope of records his team obtained.

Asked whether investigators had sought a search warrant for text messages from members of Congress, Smith replied: "No, I don't recall." When pressed on whether his team had only sought toll records, metadata showing call routing, numbers, times, and durations, Smith answered: "Correct."

He went further, defining the limits of what his office collected. Smith told the committee that toll records "do not include the content of calls." He described them as "historical telephone routing information, collected after calls had taken place."

Those statements now sit in direct tension with the DOJ records released through Grassley's committee. Those records, as the Washington Examiner reported, show Smith's team bypassed the DOJ's own filter team, an internal screening mechanism designed to protect privileged communications, and directly accessed the contents of lawmakers' text messages.

Jordan: 'They got my phone logs'

Jordan told Hannity that he was personally swept up in the collection. "They got my phone logs," Jordan said. He added that the reach extended across party lines.

"There were 44 members of the United States Congress, members, senators, members of the House. Even some Democrats, a handful of Democrats, were caught up in this. Again, you can't do that... it wasn't just the toll. I never forget the toll records issue."

Jordan was blunt about what he believes the evidence shows: "They got it, and they didn't screen it, and then Jack Smith, under oath, says, 'No, no. We didn't get any contents.' Well, shazam, it looks like they did, and it looks like he wasn't square with us when he testified in front of our committee."

The allegation that a former special counsel lied to Congress under oath is serious on its own terms. But the underlying conduct, accessing the private communications of sitting legislators without following established screening protocols, raises constitutional questions that go beyond any single investigation. The Speech or Debate Clause exists to protect lawmakers' legislative communications from executive-branch intrusion. If Smith's team circumvented that protection, the implications reach well past one prosecutor's conduct.

This is hardly the first time federal investigators have been accused of overstepping legal boundaries in politically charged probes. FBI Director Kash Patel has accused the bureau of lying to obtain FISA warrants used to surveil the Trump campaign in 2016, a pattern that, if the allegations against Smith hold up, suggests the problem is institutional, not incidental.

Hawley: 'This guy ought to be prosecuted'

Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, who also appeared on "Hannity" Wednesday, went further than Jordan. Hawley alleged that Smith not only obtained his text messages but tracked his physical location and monitored his incoming and outgoing calls.

"He also tracked my phone. He tracked my whereabouts, my location, monitored my incoming calls and my outgoing calls."

Hawley framed the matter as both a legal violation and a constitutional one, telling Hannity that DOJ policy requires screening procedures before accessing congressional members' communications. He said Smith's sworn denial that he sought those messages is flatly contradicted by the evidence.

"Jack Smith said under oath, as you just played, that he didn't seek the text messages of members of Congress. But in fact, we know that he did. So, he lied. He violated the law. He violated the Constitution. This guy ought to be prosecuted."

Hawley's characterization, that Smith "absolutely read them" and "absolutely shared them with members of his team", remains an allegation, not an adjudicated fact. But the gap between Smith's December testimony and the records Grassley released is now a matter of public record, and multiple senators from both chambers are demanding answers.

Grassley and Johnson pile on

Grassley, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee and released the list of 44 affected lawmakers, did not hold back. He told the New York Post that "Jack Smith's criminal investigation of President Trump was a runaway train that had no brakes," adding that Smith's team "ran roughshod over the Constitution even after repeated warnings."

Grassley confirmed he was among the 44 lawmakers whose communications were accessed.

Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin called the situation "yet another grotesque example of the Biden administration's weaponization of the Justice Department." Johnson went further in a separate appearance, telling Newsmax that Smith's denial constitutes a clear-cut criminal offense.

"From my standpoint, this is an open-and-shut case of lying before Congress."

Johnson noted that lying to Congress is a felony potentially punishable by up to five years in prison. He indicated Jordan is likely to move forward with a formal referral to the Justice Department.

The pattern of officials facing legal consequences for misleading conduct in politically sensitive matters has become a recurring theme. John Bolton recently pleaded guilty to retaining classified documents, a case that underscored the principle that no one, regardless of political stature, is above the law when it comes to handling sensitive government materials.

DOJ confirms investigation

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche appeared at his Senate confirmation hearing Wednesday, where Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana pressed him on the allegations. Blanche confirmed that the Justice Department is investigating the matter. No verbatim quote from Blanche was provided, but his confirmation that an investigation is underway marks a significant step.

Kennedy noted during the hearing that he was not among the 44 lawmakers on Grassley's list, but made clear the issue concerned him regardless.

The records released through the Senate Judiciary Committee were tied to a federal investigation known as Arctic Frost, Just The News reported, and followed whistleblower disclosures. The texts were obtained from the National Archives, covering phone records of Trump White House officials from October 2020 through January 20, 2022.

Smith's representatives did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

The broader question of accountability within federal law enforcement continues to hang over Washington. The FBI terminated two analysts who questioned the handling of a Fulton County election probe, raising concerns about whether internal dissent is tolerated when investigations carry political weight.

What remains unanswered

Several questions remain open. The exact legal mechanism Smith's team used to access the text message contents, if not a search warrant, has not been specified. What Smith's team did with the messages after reviewing them is still unclear. Hawley alleged they were shared among team members, but the full scope of distribution is unknown.

It is also unclear whether the December 17, 2025 deposition and other references to Smith's December testimony describe one event or multiple sessions. The identities of all 44 lawmakers on Grassley's list have not been publicly detailed in full.

And the most consequential question of all: Did Jack Smith knowingly mislead Congress, or did he parse his answers carefully enough to avoid a criminal charge? His distinction between "toll records" and message contents may have been technically precise in his own mind, but the DOJ's own records now tell a different story about what his team actually reviewed.

The Biden-era Justice Department's handling of politically sensitive investigations has drawn scrutiny from multiple directions. Former President Biden himself filed a lawsuit against the DOJ to block the release of interview audio from the special counsel probe, a move that hardly projected transparency from an administration that claimed to champion it.

The bottom line

What's emerging is a picture of a special counsel's office that collected far more than it disclosed, reviewed materials it was supposed to screen, and then told Congress, under oath, that none of it happened. If the DOJ records say what Grassley and Jordan claim they say, the gap between Smith's testimony and reality is not a matter of interpretation. It is a matter of fact.

Jordan said the committee is looking at a criminal referral "as we speak." Blanche confirmed the DOJ is already investigating. Multiple senators from both the Judiciary and other committees have called for prosecution.

For years, Americans were told the special counsel system existed to ensure accountability and equal justice. If the man who ran that system lied to Congress about spying on its members, the accountability needs to flow in both directions, and fast.