Sen. Lindsey Graham has officially put the Department of Justice on notice — and the battle could reshape how far federal investigators are allowed to go when targeting political opponents. The South Carolina Republican announced he will sue the DOJ for $500,000 after discovering investigators secretly pulled his phone records during Special Counsel Jack Smith’s wide-ranging campaign against President Donald Trump.
This new right to sue comes from a provision tucked inside the funding bill President Trump signed Wednesday night, finally bringing an end to the 43-day government shutdown. The measure allows senators to take legal action if their data was accessed without proper notification, and it applies retroactively — meaning lawmakers who were monitored during the Trump investigations now have powerful legal options.
Graham says he intends to use them.
“It bothers the hell out of me,” Graham told reporters in South Carolina, adding that he plans to “create opportunities for others to sue” who may not have known they were targeted.
The DOJ has not responded to requests for comment.
FBI Targeted Multiple Trump-Aligned Senators
A recently released unclassified report from the Senate Judiciary Committee paints a disturbing picture. According to the document, dated September 27, 2023, an FBI agent conducted what is known as a “preliminary toll analysis” — essentially a government-run investigation into who lawmakers were communicating with and when.
Phone records were reviewed for:
- Lindsey Graham
- Bill Hagerty
- Josh Hawley
- Dan Sullivan
- Tommy Tuberville
- Ron Johnson
- Cynthia Lummis
- Marsha Blackburn
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said last month he also believes he was “targeted” by investigators.
Even Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) had his records reviewed — though he cannot sue because the new law applies only to senators.
The data covered January 4–7, 2021, capturing call durations, contacts, and general locations. While the content of the calls was not recorded, the aggressive surveillance still set off alarms throughout Capitol Hill.
Both Parties React — But With Very Different Motives
Even though every Senate Republican except Rand Paul voted for the funding bill, the lawsuit provision is causing political tremors.
Democrats immediately attacked it.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) called the measure “one of the most blatantly corrupt provisions ever proposed,” insisting lawmakers should not receive legal protections after being placed under federal scrutiny.
Some Republicans shared concerns — but for entirely different reasons.
Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) was the only House Republican to vote against the bill, saying he could not support any measure that allows senators to “enrich themselves by suing the Justice Department using taxpayer dollars.”
Meanwhile, House Speaker Mike Johnson stepped in to calm the waters. He announced the House will vote next week on a standalone bill to repeal the lawsuit clause, giving Republicans the chance to refocus attention on the real issue — the politically motivated surveillance itself.
A Stunning Turn for Lindsey Graham
Graham’s lawsuit is particularly striking given his past support for surveillance tools such as:
- The Patriot Act (2001)
- The NSA’s mass-collection program (2013)
But after seeing the DOJ target multiple Trump-aligned lawmakers — many without notification — Graham says the government has crossed a constitutional line.
His lawsuit could open the floodgates for other senators who want to expose what they view as a weaponized Justice Department, one that has repeatedly directed its power toward President Trump and those who support him.
Bottom Line
A major confrontation is now underway between President Trump’s allies in Congress and a DOJ still facing intense scrutiny for its conduct during the investigations of 2020–2021. If Graham’s lawsuit succeeds, it could reshape federal oversight, surveillance rules, and accountability for years to come — and it may help expose just how far the government went in its pursuit of Trump.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.