Former special counsel Jack Smith has hit back at Senator Bill Hagerty's attempt to strip him of his law licence, calling the Tennessee Republican's bar complaint a "retaliatory political stunt". The Jack Smith disbarment fight, first reported by Politico on Friday, November 13, 2026, is the latest clash over the Justice Department's investigation of the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol. Smith's lawyers say it misstates the law, leans on selectively leaked documents and was filed to punish his Senate testimony in September.

Key Points

• Smith's lawyers wrote to Tennessee's Board of Professional Responsibility on November 3, 2026, calling Hagerty's complaint a "retaliatory political stunt".
• Hagerty filed the complaint on September 30, 2026, the day after Smith testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee, asking the board to revoke Smith's law licence.
• The senator alleges Smith unconstitutionally obtained phone records of Hagerty and other Republican lawmakers around January 6, 2021, as part of the Arctic Frost investigation.
• Smith's lawyers say the complaint misstates the scope of Congress's immunity from prosecutorial scrutiny and rests on selectively leaked documents.
• Neither Hagerty nor the Tennessee board immediately responded to Politico's request for comment.

What Happened

Smith's lawyers sent the letter on November 3, 2026; Politico reported its contents on Friday, November 13. It argues Hagerty's complaint gets the law wrong and was built from selectively released documents. Their central claim is about motive: the filing, they say, was designed to punish Smith for his September testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Hagerty lodged his complaint with the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee on September 30, 2026, the day after Smith's testimony. It asks the board to revoke Smith's licence to practise law. It accuses Smith of unconstitutionally obtaining the phone records of Hagerty and other Republican senators around January 6, 2021, withholding critical information from a federal court, and barring phone companies from telling the senators their call logs had been subpoenaed.

Background: Arctic Frost and the January 6 Phone Records

The phone records at the centre of the dispute were gathered as part of Arctic Frost, the federal investigation into efforts surrounding the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol and the attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election. Smith, appointed special counsel in 2022, led the federal election-interference case that grew out of that inquiry. Prosecutors obtained call records belonging to several Republican lawmakers, a step Hagerty now says crossed a constitutional line.

Investigators routinely seek phone records through court orders, and the orders here also kept the phone providers from notifying the senators while the investigation was active, a common practice meant to stop targets learning they are under scrutiny. Hagerty's complaint treats those steps as misconduct, but Smith's lawyers say it misstates how far Congress's immunity from prosecutorial scrutiny reaches.

The Jack Smith Disbarment Fight

Disbarment is the harshest penalty a state bar authority can impose. In Tennessee, the Board of Professional Responsibility investigates complaints and can recommend sanctions to the state Supreme Court. A complaint alone revokes nothing; the board must weigh the filing, the lawyer's response and the evidence before deciding on further action, a hearing or dismissal.

That procedure is now carrying a heavy political load. For Hagerty and his allies, the complaint holds Smith accountable for an investigation they say trampled on lawmakers' rights. For Smith's lawyers, it tests whether disciplinary machinery can be turned against a prosecutor over the lawful steps of an investigation he no longer controls. Smith's side sees it plainly: a complaint filed the day after his Senate testimony, built on leaked material and aimed at retaliation, not professional standards.

Reactions and Quotes

The sharpest words in the exchange come from Smith's own letter, which calls Hagerty's bid a "retaliatory political stunt". His lawyers argue the complaint's legal theory is wrong, its evidence cherry-picked, and its timing — one day after Smith testified under oath — gives away its purpose.

Neither Hagerty nor the Tennessee board immediately responded to Politico's request for comment, leaving Smith's account unanswered for now. In a separate development, the Justice Department barred Smith from testifying in President Donald Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the BBC in a November 2, 2026 letter, citing grand-jury secrecy and other privileges.

Why It Matters

The case matters well beyond one lawyer's licence. If a bar complaint can punish a prosecutor for court-approved investigative steps, critics say it could chill future prosecutors from pursuing sensitive cases involving powerful people. Supporters of Hagerty's complaint argue the opposite: without a check, prosecutors can gather lawmakers' private records with little consequence. The dispute also turns on how far the immunity protecting lawmakers' legislative work extends into criminal investigations of January 6.

It also lands in a broader pattern. Smith has been a recurring target of Republican criticism since his appointment as special counsel, and the disbarment bid follows his Senate testimony, his role in the cases against Trump and the move to block his BBC testimony. Each episode feeds a running argument over whether the Justice Department's Trump-era work was legitimate law enforcement or political persecution, now playing out in bar discipline as well as in courtrooms and on Capitol Hill.

What Happens Next

The Tennessee board will now decide how to handle Hagerty's complaint in light of Smith's response. No timetable has been announced, and the board has not said publicly whether it will open a formal investigation, seek more information or dismiss the matter. Smith remains licensed while the process runs, and any move by the board, in either direction, is likely to draw swift reaction from both parties.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who is Jack Smith?
Jack Smith is the former special counsel who led the federal investigations into Donald Trump, including the election-interference case arising from January 6, 2021.

What does Senator Hagerty allege?
Hagerty alleges Smith unconstitutionally obtained phone records of Hagerty and other Republican senators around January 6, 2021, withheld critical information from a federal court, and obtained a court order barring phone providers from telling the senators.

What is Arctic Frost?
Arctic Frost was the federal investigation into the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack and the attempt to overturn the 2020 election; the phone records were obtained as part of it.

Can a senator get a lawyer disbarred?
Not directly. A complaint goes to Tennessee's Board of Professional Responsibility, which investigates and can recommend sanctions to the state Supreme Court. A complaint alone changes nothing.

What happens next?
The board will weigh Hagerty's complaint against Smith's response. No timeline has been given, and neither has yet publicly answered Smith's letter.

Read more: Justice Department Bars Jack Smith From Testifying in BBC Case | Van Hollen Pledges Filibuster Abolition | White House Weighs Pushing Out Lutnick Amid Nvidia Spy Scandal