Raskin defends Smith's subpoenas while backing broader notice protections
Jamie RaskinU.S. representative from Maryland, speaking on the House floor
Raskin says the phone-record subpoenas and secrecy orders complied with existing law and Justice Department policy. He supports the NDO Fairness Act as a privacy reform for everyone and criticizes a separate senators-only damages remedy.
“As part of his investigation into that attack, Special Counsel Smith asked a Federal grand jury to subpoena the phone companies for the records associated with individual Members of Congress known to have been in contact with the White House over a 4-day period running from around January 6, 2021. The subpoena sought call records, the kind of information that is on your phone bill, not the content of any calls or text messages, but a record of who called who when. He also asked a Federal judge to issue an NDO for those subpoenas. He did so after receiving permission to do so from the Public Integrity Section and in full compliance with both existing law and DOJ policy.”
Original text
Other statements by Jamie Raskin in this case
Every statement by Jamie Raskin
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 text
About this source
Fitzgerald and Raskin support limits on secrecy orders but disagree about the propriety of Smith's congressional-record subpoenas. The House passes the bill; this source does not establish enactment.
Before the quotation
Raskin supports statutory limits on indefinite secrecy orders and explains why temporary nondisclosure can be necessary to protect investigations.
After the quotation
He calls the subpoenas lawful and the nondisclosure justified, then criticizes the separate remedy that had allowed senators to seek damages.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The case concerns whether Smith properly obtained congressional records. Raskin defends the subpoenas and secrecy orders under existing rules, while supporting prospective limits on secrecy.
- Recorded on
- Published here
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
- Raskin defends Smith's subpoenas while backing broader notice protections
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/7612-raskin-says-the-phone-record-subpoenas-and-secrecy
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Raskin defends Smith's subpoenas while backing broader notice protections". First published: 2026-11-01. Last updated: 2026-11-01. https://disputeindex.com/events/7612-raskin-says-the-phone-record-subpoenas-and-secrecy