The House is advancing a repeal of a recently enacted provision that allows senators to sue the federal government for $500,000 if their phone records or related Senate data are seized without notice. The clause — retroactive to 2022 — could affect at least eight Republican senators tied to special counsel Jack Smith's probe. Supporters call the measure a needed check on alleged "weaponization" by investigators; critics criticize its last-minute insertion into a funding bill. The repeal is expected to pass the House and move the debate to the Senate.
House Poised to Repeal Law Letting Senators Seek $500,000 Over Seized Phone Records
The House is advancing a repeal of a recently enacted provision that allows senators to sue the federal government for $500,000 if their phone records or related Senate data are seized without notice. The clause — retroactive to 2022 — could affect at least eight Republican senators tied to special counsel Jack Smith's probe. Supporters call the measure a needed check on alleged "weaponization" by investigators; critics criticize its last-minute insertion into a funding bill. The repeal is expected to pass the House and move the debate to the Senate.
01:26 AM, 11/20/2025Politics
Lawmakers in the House are moving quickly to repeal a recently enacted provision that allows U.S. senators to sue the federal government for $500,000 if investigators seize their phone records or other Senate-related data without notice.
What the law does
The provision requires service providers to notify a senator when phone records or other Senate data are seized or subpoenaed. Courts may not delay that notice unless the senator is the target of a criminal investigation. The statute creates a private right of action against the United States and permits a $500,000 award for each violation, with limits on how the government may rebut such claims. The measure is retroactive to 2022.
Why it matters
The retroactive clause could allow at least eight Republican senators to sue over subpoenas of their phone records tied to special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election. The senators identified as having had records subpoenaed are Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Bill Hagerty (Tenn.), Josh Hawley (Mo.), Ron Johnson (Wis.), Cynthia Lummis (Wyo.), Dan Sullivan (Alaska) and Tommy Tuberville (Ala.).
Political reaction and next steps
The House plans to consider the repeal under a suspension of the rules, where it is expected to pass with the two-thirds majority required. Senate Majority Leader John Thune defended the original provision as a necessary check on what he described as potential "weaponization" by the Justice Department, saying the law provides accountability and a remedy for harmed senators.
“The House isn't implicated in what we did. It just simply applies to the Senate,” Thune said, adding that the change addresses a statute violation and offers a private remedy for harmed parties.
Critics — including some Republicans — condemned the clause’s last-minute insertion into a year-long funding bill for the legislative branch, which cleared Congress as part of a package to end a partial government shutdown. House Speaker Mike Johnson said the Senate leader "regretted the way it was done" and described the action as "way out of line." Some House Republicans and Democrats said they opposed the provision but supported the larger funding package to avoid prolonging the shutdown.
Most of the affected senators have said they do not plan to pursue damages; Senator Lindsey Graham signaled he may sue and said he wants a punitive outcome to deter similar actions. The repeal vote in the House is likely to prompt debate in the Senate over both the substance of the protection and the process by which it was added.
Outlook
If the House repeal passes, the Senate will decide whether to sustain or overturn the change. The debate is likely to center on competing themes: accountability and deterrence versus process, fairness and separation of powers.