Hagerty files bar complaint saying Smith hid from the court that the records belonged to members of Congress
Bill HagertyU.S. senator from Tennessee, in a complaint to the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee
Sen. Bill Hagerty filed a complaint with Tennessee's Board of Professional Responsibility saying Jack Smith obtained a nondisclosure order for a Verizon subpoena of Hagerty's and other senators' call records without telling the court the records belonged to members of Congress or citing the Speech or Debate Clause or a federal law on Senate data. He wrote that the order kept him from moving to quash the subpoena and asked the board to pursue disbarment.
“Mr. Smith violated the Rules of Professional Conduct by seeking and obtaining a nondisclosure order from a federal district court without advising the court of critical facts and law. The impact of his lack of candor was a violation of federal law, and an invasion of the very constitutional privileges that ensure a fully free legislative process.”
Original post
Where this statement fits
Were members of Congress's phone records and text messages properly obtained in the Arctic Frost and Jack Smith investigations?
On September 29, 2026, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing titled "Oversight of Jack Smith's Abuse of Authority and the Targeting of Republicans and Related Matters," with former special counsel Jack Smith as its only witness. Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and other Republicans said that Smith's team, in the FBI's Arctic Frost investigation and its own election case, obtained members of Congress's phone toll records and text messages, used nondisclosure orders to keep members from learning of it, and breached the Speech or Debate Clause. Smith said the toll records were non-content records obtained after he directed his staff to consult the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section, and that the nondisclosure orders were consistent with the law and Justice Department policy at the time. Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-IL) called the attacks on Smith "petty, personal, and political." The sides and the documents give different counts of the members affected. The dispute is whether the collection of members' phone records and messages was proper.
Source and context
Original post
About this source
Post by Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) at 11:05 a.m. ET on September 30, 2026, attaching his four-page complaint to R. Culver Schmid, chairman of the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee. The complaint says the special counsel's subpoena to Verizon sought Hagerty's non-content call records, that a nondisclosure order kept him from learning of it in time to move to quash, and that Smith's motion for that order did not tell Chief Judge James Boasberg the records belonged to members of Congress or cite the Speech or Debate Clause or 2 U.S.C. 6628. It asks the board to investigate and pursue disbarment. The post reads in part, "Next up, @Verizon."
Before the quotation
Hagerty posted on X that morning, "I filed a bar complaint against Jack Smith this morning. He's a blatantly partisan actor and his prosecutorial misconduct damaged our constitutional order. He should never be able to practice law again." The quoted passage opens the attached letter, which identifies Smith by his Tennessee bar number.
After the quotation
The letter says Smith's subpoena to Verizon sought non-content records of Hagerty's calls and those of other senators, and that the accompanying nondisclosure order forbade Verizon from telling anyone, "myself included." It says Chief Judge James Boasberg's order did not mention the Speech or Debate Clause, 2 U.S.C. 6628 or that the records pertained to members of Congress, and asks the board to pursue "the most serious remedy possible—disbarment."
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
Relative to whether members' phone records were properly obtained, Hagerty says Smith's nondisclosure order was obtained without disclosing critical facts and law, violated federal law and invaded constitutional legislative privileges. That rejects how the records were obtained, so we labeled it Condemned.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Jack Smith
More from this case
Read the full caseGrassley calls Smith's actions unlawful and unconstitutional
“the major embarrassment of the hearing was Democrats falling over themselves defending unlawful and unconstitutional actions by Jack Smith.”Read statement
Harker argues for personal accountability in Blackburn's suit
“She filed it against Jack Smith in his personal capacity to seek accountability, not money”Read statement
Chenoweth condemns alleged concealment supporting the records order
“I think that it's intolerable behavior”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Hagerty files bar complaint saying Smith hid from the court that the records belonged to members of Congress
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/4024-sen-bill-hagerty-filed-a-complaint-with-tennessee
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Hagerty files bar complaint saying Smith hid from the court that the records belonged to members of Congress". First published: 2026-10-01. Last updated: 2026-10-01. https://disputeindex.com/events/4024-sen-bill-hagerty-filed-a-complaint-with-tennessee