this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2025
103 points (100.0% liked)

politics

26328 readers
2656 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Spending Bill Would Pave Way for Senators to Sue Over Phone Searches

Republicans have voiced outrage that Jack Smith looked at G.O.P. lawmakers’ phone records surrounding the Jan. 6 attack. Legislation to reopen the government would allow them to sue for $500,000 each.

A spending package expected to be approved as part of a deal to reopen the government would create a wide legal avenue for senators to sue for as much as half a million dollars each when federal investigators search their phone records without notifying them.

The provision, tucked into a measure to fund the legislative branch, appears to immediately allow for eight G.O.P. senators to sue the government over their phone records being seized in the course of the investigation by Jack Smith, the former special counsel, into the riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

The provision would make it a violation of the law to not notify a senator if their phone records or other metadata was taken from a service provider like a phone company. There are some exceptions, such as 60-day delays in notification if the senator is considered the target of an investigation.

The language of the bill states that “any senator whose Senate data, or the Senate data of whose Senate office, has been acquired, subpoenaed, searched, accessed, or disclosed in violation of this section may bring a civil action against the United States if the violation was committed by an officer, employee, or agent of the United States or of any federal department or agency.”

Because the provision is retroactive to 2022, it would appear to make eligible the eight lawmakers whose phone records were subpoenaed by investigators for Mr. Smith as he examined efforts by Donald J. Trump to obstruct the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Each violation would be worth at least $500,000 in any legal claim, according to the bill language. The bill would also sharply limit the way the government could resist such a claim, taking away any government claims of qualified or sovereign immunity to fight a lawsuit over the issue.

The Republican senators whose phone records were subpoenaed as part of the investigation were: Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Marsha Blackburn and Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Dan Sullivan of Alaska, Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming. Representative Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania also had his phone records subpoenaed but would not be eligible because he is a member of the House.

Mr. Smith requested the phone records of the lawmakers in 2023, but they were not formally told of the subpoenas until earlier this year. Republican lawmakers, including the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, have denounced the investigative tactic used against lawmakers, referring to it as inappropriate spying.

It was unclear which Republican lawmaker added the language on phone searches to the bill.

Mr. Smith, through his lawyers, has denied any wrongdoing, saying it was a legitimate and authorized investigative tactic to understand the actions of Mr. Trump and his inner circle, suggesting it was not meant to scrutinize the actions of the lawmakers themselves.

Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, accused Republicans of hiding a provision in the funding bill that would give millions of taxpayer dollars “to a handful of Republican senators who helped Trump try to overthrow the government.”

Mr. Wyden said in a statement that every American “should have the right to be told if the government spies on them,” but added that this bill “takes a reasonable protection against government surveillance and wraps it in an unacceptable giveaway of your tax dollars to Republican senators.”

Seizing someone’s phone records does not mean investigators can listen to conversations or know the contents of the conversations. The phone records, often referred to as metadata, are like phone billing records, in that they show what numbers that phone called and received calls from, how long the calls lasted, and often where the calls were made.

Devlin Barrett covers the Justice Department and the F.B.I. for The Times.

A version of this article appears in print on Nov. 11, 2025, Section A, Page 20 of the New York edition with the headline: Provision Tucked Into Spending Bill Would Allow Senators to Sue Over Phone Searches.

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jivandabeast@lemmy.browntown.dev 43 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Of course this is only for senators, god forbid they give us mere civilians the same protections 🙄

[–] henfredemars@lemdro.id 24 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

They also enjoy legal insider trading, free unlimited use of the postal service, and the best healthcare in the world at no cost to the senator!

[–] FrostyTheDoo@lemmy.world 6 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Wow who the fuck allowed all of that?? (It was the senate)

[–] RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world 37 points 18 hours ago

Retroactive? So they can sue for something that already happened? That's completely insane.

[–] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 23 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Reminds me of the "internet privacy act" which just eliminate internet privacy by allowing ISPs to mine browsing data. The one exception was for members of congress.....

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 15 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

How about all thos patriots who benefitted from the PATRIOT Act?

[–] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 4 points 16 hours ago
[–] HasturInYellow@lemmy.world 19 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Nearly every politician is a traitor to this country. There are so few that do not literally deserve execution for selling out HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE FOR PROFIT.

There is no punishment too extreme for these abominations.

[–] Harkronis@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 16 hours ago

Too bad we're several generations removed from the times when the people actually held the politicians accountable for what they've done.

Now we're in the generation of armchair revolution and "we'll say what we want to do but...won't actually do it" kinds.

That's how today's politicians and the past few administrations have gotten away. This administration has thoroughly proven as to how absolutely lazy and uneducated a majority of Americans are.

The more times we ask ourselves "what can we really do?" or "nothing we can do about it" is just one more W for these politicians.