US House passes bill to repeal the phone records law that could have made Senators rich

The US House of Representatives on Wednesday unanimously passed a law that would block American Senators from suing for substantial sums if they aren’t notified when law enforcement seeks their phone records. The new bill would repeal the law that came into existence very recently.

According to The Hill, the House passed the repeal in a resounding 426-0 vote, serving as a signal of the bipartisan outrage about the provision itself. It also reflected that the House disagreed with the process by which the controversial law was signed just last week.

Under the existing legislation, senators — not House members — can sue for $500,000 if their records were subpoenaed or obtained without notifying them first.

The law was in response to Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) revealing last month that former special counsel Jack Smith’s “Arctic Frost” investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election sought phone records from 10 Republican senators and at least one House member, Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), whose staffer was involved in trying to help deliver names of fake electors.

More from United States Of America

America’s longest shutdown comes to an end. When will government services resume? This Week in Explainers: How suicide bomber killed 12 in Islamabad

The provision passed unnoticed

Interestingly, the legislation was tucked into the bill to reopen the federal government, crafted by the Senate earlier this month. However, it eventually came as an unwelcome surprise to House lawmakers and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who saw the provision as a means of self-enrichment.

Last week, Johnson said that he was “very angry” about the lawsuit provision, and that it was “way out of line.” “We had no idea that was dropped in at the last minute,” the American speaker of the House averred.

Still, House Republicans opted to pass the bill at that time rather than trying to take out the provision, which would have required them to send the legislation back to the Senate and further delay reopening the government.

Will we see Senate vs House over the matter?

However, soon after the bill was passed in the House, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) poured cold water on the repeal effort. “The statute that was violated applied only to the Senate, which is why we addressed it the way that we did,” Thune fired back over the criticism during a press conference on Wednesday.

“We strengthened that provision when it comes to allowing a federal government agency, the Justice Department, in this case, to collect information, private information, on individual senators. We think that is a violation of powers under the Constitution,” he said.

Quick Reads

View All

As Trump weaponises tariff, Fed sees a bigger worry: Not jobs, but rising prices in America

Despite a backdown deal, Trump deploys hundreds more National Guard troops in Washington DC

However, most Senators, who could take advantage of the legislation, appeared to distance themselves from the assertion. But some were still supporting the Senate Republican majority leader. Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) said he plans to sue and told reporters he would keep some of the money if he wins.

Meanwhile, Rep. John Rose (R-Tenn.), one of the most vocal members opposing the provision, on Wednesday introduced an alternate resolution authorising Johnson to bring the matter before the courts and challenge it as unconstitutional if the Senate declines to bring it up.

It is pertinent to note that Rose will be running for governor against Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), who has said she could sue under the bill but has said she will not sue for monetary damages. During floor debate on the bill, Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) placed blame on Republican leadership for letting that measure become law.

“We also need to ask how this was allowed to happen. And I have to tell you, it doesn’t help that the House wasn’t even here. For six straight weeks, House leadership decided to cancel our sessions,” Kiley said on the House floor, saying he warned at the time it would make the House “irrelevant in any deal to re-open the government.”

“Of course, that’s what ended up happening,” Kiley said. “They negotiated their own deal. And after 50 days away, the House was brought back for one fly-by vote to ratify what the Senate came up with," he added.