Jack Smith’s Career on the Line: Senator Demands Disbarment Over…

Former special counsel Jack Smith, the prosecutor who brought two federal indictments against President Donald Trump, now faces a fight over his ability to practice law. A sitting U.S. senator has formally asked Tennessee’s attorney disciplinary board to pursue the harshest sanction available: disbarment.

Republican Sen. Bill Hagerty of Tennessee filed the complaint on Wednesday with the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Tennessee Supreme Court. The filing came one day after Smith testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee about his criminal cases against Trump.

“I filed a bar complaint against Jack Smith this morning,” Hagerty wrote on X. “He should never be able to practice law again.”

Hagerty called Smith a blatantly partisan actor and said his prosecutorial misconduct damaged the nation’s constitutional order. The four-page letter lays out what he considers a serious breach of professional duty.

At the center of the complaint is Smith’s acquisition of phone records tied to sitting members of Congress. Hagerty says Smith subpoenaed Verizon for non-content records of calls made by him and other senators.

The records in question are toll records, which show call data rather than the content of conversations. The complaint does not allege that Smith obtained the content of any calls or texts.

Hagerty’s core accusation is a lack of candor with the court. He argues that Smith’s request to the judge left out the fact that the records belonged to members of Congress.

According to the letter, that omission kept the judge from spotting a legislative-privilege problem. The Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause gives members of Congress very high protections for legislative communications.

Hagerty also alleges that Smith apparently drafted the order himself and that the judge then signed it. He says nondisclosure orders kept the senators in the dark, leaving them with no legal recourse or appeal.

The complaint argues that this conduct violated rules requiring lawyers to be candid with courts in one-sided proceedings. Such proceedings, where only the government appears, place a special burden on prosecutors to disclose all material facts.

“Smith’s actions have set a precedent that a legislator should think twice before answering the phone,” Hagerty wrote. He warned of a chilling effect on communications between lawmakers and the people they serve.

The senator asked the board to seek what he called the most serious remedy possible. He cited the gravity of the alleged conduct, the harm to the constitutional order and what he described as Smith’s lack of remorse.

Smith has a different account. He told senators that the nondisclosure orders were submitted consistent with the law and Justice Department policy, and that his office followed court procedures.

During the hearing, Smith insisted he acted in a nonpartisan manner. Many Republicans reportedly left the session unsatisfied with his answers.

It is important to understand where things actually stand. Filing a bar complaint does not establish professional misconduct, and no disciplinary finding against Smith has been announced.

The Tennessee board screens allegations first. If it finds a basis, it can open an investigation, and the possible outcomes range from dismissal to private discipline, public censure, suspension or, in the most serious cases, disbarment.

Smith has a direct connection to Tennessee. He holds a license there and previously worked as a federal prosecutor in Nashville.

The complaint adds a new front to a long fight over his work. Conservatives have criticized his investigations as lawfare, and one of his two cases against Trump collapsed after Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that Smith’s appointment violated the Constitution.

That Florida case charged Trump with unlawfully retaining classified documents after leaving office and obstructing efforts to recover them. The other case, which concerned the 2020 election, never reached trial.

The Arctic Frost investigation, which produced the subpoenas at issue, has become a lightning rod on Capitol Hill. Republicans have said they want a full accounting of what was collected and why.