Republican Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio has issued a demand for former special counsel Jack Smith to appear before the House Judiciary Committee. In a letter sent on Tuesday, Jordan criticized Smith for what he claims is the improper use of federal law enforcement under the Biden-Harris administration.

Jordan’s letter underscores his concerns about the alleged politicization of federal agencies, emphasizing the need for Smith’s testimony to uncover the extent of these practices. “As the Committee continues its oversight, your testimony is necessary to understand the full extent to which the Biden-Harris Justice Department weaponized federal law enforcement,” Jordan asserted.

Jack Smith, in his previous role, conducted investigations into former President Donald Trump regarding his involvement in the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot as well as the improper handling of classified documents. This request from Jordan adds another layer to the ongoing scrutiny surrounding these high-profile investigations.

GOP Rep. Jim Jordan (Ohio) is demanding that former special counsel Jack Smith testify before the House Judiciary Committee, blasting him in a Tuesday letter for allegedly weaponizing federal law enforcement.

“As the Committee continues its oversight, your testimony is necessary to understand the full extent to which the Biden-Harris Justice Department weaponized federal law enforcement,” Jordan wrote.

Smith previously investigated President Trump for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack and the mishandling of classified documents. 

Jordan accused Smith of launching an “abusive surveillance” of sitting lawmakers after obtaining their phone records for review in connection to Trump’s alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, and he alleged that Smith’s office conducted additional “politically motivated investigations.”

Several members of Smith’s team including former senior assistant special counsel Thomas Windom and former counselor to the special counsel Jay Bratt were called to provide testimony to the committee, but Jordan says they “failed to fully cooperate” by invoking the Fifth Amendment or declining to answer questions. 

Jordan is requesting a copy of all documents and communications received by Smith while he was serving as special counsel, with a special focus on communications between him and political appointees or senior career officials of the Biden-Harris administration in addition to communications related to his appointment.

“As the Special Counsel, you are ultimately responsible for the prosecutorial misconduct and constitutional abuses of your office. Your misdeeds were so flagrant that the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility confirmed to the Committee in November 2024 that it had opened an inquiry into the tactics of your office,” Jordan wrote to Smith.  

“Over the course of our oversight, we have written you several times to request documents relating to your politicized investigation. You failed to respond. Accordingly, to further our oversight, the Committee requires your testimony at a transcribed interview,” he added. 

Earlier this year, Smith resigned from the Justice Department following Trump’s win in last year’s presidential election. Days after announcing his departure, he issued a letter to former Attorney General Merrick Garland defending his decision to prosecute Trump. 

“The ultimate decision to bring charges against Mr. Trump was mine. It is a decision I stand behind fully,” Smith wrote, adding that Garland nor anyone else at the Justice Department pushed him to prosecute Trump.

“To all who know me well, the claim from Mr. Trump that my decisions as a prosecutor were influenced or directed by the Biden administration or other political actors is, in a word, laughable.”

Smith denied claims that the probe was intended to impact the 2024 presidential election and said his decision to rescind the charges was not a sign of Trump’s innocence.

“Upon completing that review, Mr. Trump has not contested a single factual representation in the Report, instead objecting only to its public release,” Smith wrote.

“Mr. Trump’s letter claims that dismissal of his criminal cases signifies Mr. Trump’s ‘complete exoneration.’ That is false. … The Department’s view that the Constitution prohibits Mr. Trump’s indictment and prosecution while he is in office is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution — all of which the Office stands fully behind.”