Sen. Hagerty Files Bar Complaint Against Jack Smith: 'His Prosecutorial Misconduct Damaged Our Constitutional Order'

Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-TN) has filed a bar complaint against former special counsel Jack Smith — who brought two federal indictments against President Donald Trump — calling him a “partisan actor” and declaring that “his prosecutorial misconduct damaged our constitutional order.” “I filed a bar complaint against Jack Smith this morning,” Hagerty wrote in an X post Wednesday. “He’s a blatantly partisan actor and his prosecutorial misconduct damaged our constitutional order. He should never be able to practice law again.” “Next up, @Verizon,” the senator warned at the end of his post. In his letter to R. Culver Schmid, who serves as Chairman of the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee, Hagerty wrote, “I am submitting a formal complaint of serious misconduct by John ‘Jack’ Luman Smith.” The senator continued: 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. Hagerty went on to explain that the Constitution gives members of Congress wide protection for their official communications, and that Smith “failed to disclose critical facts and law to a federal court.” “During the Biden administration, Jack Smith served as Special Counsel in the U.S. Department of Justice. In that role, he sent a subpoena to Verizon, my cell phone provider,” the senator wrote. Hagerty argued that Smith obtained congressional phone records under a secret court order that never flagged the constitutional and statutory protections those records may have. “I never had an opportunity to intervene and quash the subpoena, however,” he said, “because accompanying the subpoena to Verizon was a nondisclosure order forbidding Verizon from telling anyone–myself included–and a letter from Smith threatening Verizon with obstruction of justice should it disobey.” “The nondisclosure order was issued by District of D.C. Chief Judge James Boasberg,” Hagerty added. The senator then noted that the order did not mention the Speech or Debate Clause, a Senate law requiring notice when someone seeks Senate data, or the fact that the records belonged to members of Congress. Hagerty goes on to claim that Smith’s filing left out the facts and law that would have alerted the judge to a legislative-privilege issue — and that Smith apparently drafted the order himself, which the judge then signed. The senator also said that the former special counsel has admitted that a gag order can stop the very people who might try to quash a subpoena from ever learning about it. “That was certainly true in this case, for unquestionably I (and my colleagues) would have aggressively contested his subpoena had we only known about it,” Hagerty declared. “The invasion of Congress’s legislative privileges was complete when Verizon refused to contest the subpoena and handed over my records,” the senator asserted. In his final argument, focusing on Smith having “violated the Rules of Professional Conduct,” Hagerty explained that when a lawyer goes to a judge without the other side present, the lawyer has a special duty not to withhold key information. A lawyer must tell the judge important facts they know — even ones that can hurt their case — so that the judge can make a decision with the full picture in mind, the senator wrote. He added that a lawyer must also tell the judge about controlling legal authority that cuts against their argument–if the other side isn’t there to raise it. “The fact that the subpoena to Verizon sought the phone records of members of Congress likely to involve communications concerning legislative acts was undoubtedly material, yet Smith did not disclose it,” Hagerty wrote. “A prosecutor must provide a court with sufficient facts to permit the court to conduct the same case- and fact-specific analysis,” he added. Hagerty wrote the following as the conclusion of his letter: Jack Smith’s lack of candor before a federal tribunal directly resulted in injury to the United States Congress. The Board should investigate and pursue the most serious remedy possible — disbarment — in light of the gravity of Smith’s intentional conduct; the effect of totally depriving members of Congress of legal recourse and appeal; the broader harm to our constitutional order, including the chilling effect on legislative communications; and his lack of remorse. As Breitbart News reported, it was also revealed on Tuesday that Smith’s investigators obtained internal communications between scores of journalists and Trump administration officials during the federal election investigation of President Trump. Smith testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. Readers can watch the hearing here. Alana Mastrangelo-Wrask is a reporter for Breitbart News. You can follow her on Facebook and X at @ARmastrangelo, and on Instagram.