House Judiciary Chair Refers Former Jack Smith Deputy Thomas Windom to DOJ, Alleging Obstruction

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) has submitted a 19-page referral asking the Department of Justice to consider criminal charges against Thomas Windom, a former senior attorney for Special Counsel Jack Smith. The referral alleges Windom obstructed the committee's investigation by refusing to answer most questions during two closed depositions earlier this year.

According to the referral, Windom — a veteran federal prosecutor who was dismissed during the second Trump administration — invoked the Fifth Amendment, cited federal grand jury secrecy rules, and offered other reasons for declining to respond to dozens of questions. Chairman Jordan said those explanations were insufficient, noting that Windom had been explicitly authorized by DOJ on two separate occasions to answer certain topics yet still declined to do so.

The committee contrasted Windom's testimony with that of another former prosecutor, J.P. Cooney, who it says was more forthcoming. "Windom’s improper refusal to answer nearly all questions during his deposition obstructed the Committee’s fact-finding," the referral states, arguing that Windom, as a senior aide to the special counsel, possesses unique firsthand knowledge relevant to the inquiry.

"As a senior assistant to Special Counsel Jack Smith, Windom possesses unique, firsthand information about the work of that Office. Yet, despite being given express authorization by DOJ on two separate occasions, Windom declined to answer questions during his deposition about topics necessary and relevant to the Committee's inquiry."

The committee sought information about Windom's role in the office that investigated allegations concerning former President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election and about his support for Special Counsel Smith's work. Congressional referrals to the DOJ are common practice, but the Justice Department is not required to open or pursue criminal charges based on such referrals.

This is the second referral from Chairman Jordan's committee in recent months; in October he asked the DOJ to consider charges relating to testimony by a different former official.

Windom's attorney told committee members during a September deposition that his client had cooperated "in good faith" and argued that both committee Republicans and the DOJ failed to provide reciprocal protections or cooperation. The lawyer said that the DOJ departed from a customary practice of shielding line attorneys from testifying in Congress without counsel and accused the committee majority of staging "a performative exercise" that left Windom facing an impossible choice between violating grand jury secrecy rules or risking contempt of Congress.

"They have intentionally placed him on the horns of an impossible dilemma, forcing him to choose between risking criminal prosecution for violating grand jury secrecy rules or, alternatively, risking criminal prosecution for contempt of Congress."

What happens next: The referral now goes to the Department of Justice, which will determine whether to open a criminal investigation or pursue charges. There is no set timetable for the DOJ to act on congressional referrals.