Sen. Lindsey Graham reacted angrily after learning his phone metadata was subpoenaed without his knowledge in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s probe into events around January 6, 2021. The subpoenas — reportedly part of an investigation called “Arctic Frost” — covered Jan. 4–7, 2021, and included gag orders preventing telecoms from notifying targets. Critics note Graham previously supported major surveillance measures, including the PATRIOT Act and Section 702-related legislation, and say his outrage could prompt legislative reforms if similarly concerned senators act.
Lindsey Graham Calls Out Secret Subpoenas — But He Helped Build the Surveillance Powers
Sen. Lindsey Graham reacted angrily after learning his phone metadata was subpoenaed without his knowledge in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s probe into events around January 6, 2021. The subpoenas — reportedly part of an investigation called “Arctic Frost” — covered Jan. 4–7, 2021, and included gag orders preventing telecoms from notifying targets. Critics note Graham previously supported major surveillance measures, including the PATRIOT Act and Section 702-related legislation, and say his outrage could prompt legislative reforms if similarly concerned senators act.
06:04 AM, 11/20/2025Politics
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) has publicly protested after learning that his phone metadata was subpoenaed without his knowledge as part of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into the January 6, 2021, events. Graham has accused investigators of spying, demanded the suspension and impeachment of the judge who approved the subpoena and related gag order, and threatened multimillion-dollar lawsuits.
What happened: According to disclosures from former Trump-era official Kash Patel, telephone records for eight Republican senators — including Graham — were sought in an investigation codenamed “Arctic Frost.” The records reportedly covered January 4–7, 2021, and the subpoenas carried gag orders that prevented telecommunications providers from notifying the senators that their data had been requested.
Graham’s reaction
“They spied on my phone records as a senator and a private citizen. I’m sick of it,” Graham said in a recent interview.
Graham has demanded action against the federal judge who authorized the order and has signaled he will pursue civil claims, though he has not identified a specific defendant in his threats to sue for "tens of millions of dollars." The episode has prompted bipartisan concern about secrecy, gag orders, and the scope of metadata collection.
Context: His record on surveillance
Critics point out that Graham has long supported broad federal surveillance authorities. As a member of the House, he voted for the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001. After disclosures about mass collection of phone records, he defended intelligence efforts to track potential threats. He voted to codify certain surveillance authorities into what is commonly called Section 702 in 2008, backed repeated reauthorizations, and in 2017 supported measures that would have made Section 702 permanent — removing periodic congressional review. He has also supported proposals that would weaken strong encryption for online communications.
That record has led observers to note the irony of Graham’s current outrage: he is railing against a system whose expansion he, in part, helped enable.
What this could mean
Graham’s public anger could become a catalyst for change if lawmakers who share his concerns act to rein in secrecy and strengthen privacy protections. The same senators whose records were swept up in the probe have the authority to push for reforms — from narrowing gag orders to tightening standards for when metadata subpoenas can be issued.
For now, the episode underscores a persistent tension: large-scale surveillance capabilities can be presented as tools to catch dangerous actors, but they also create serious privacy risks when applied to elected officials or ordinary citizens without clear notice and oversight.