DOJ Subpoenaed Jim Jordan’s Phone Records Covering More Than Two Years

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice subpoenaed House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan’s personal phone records in 2022, requesting data spanning more than two years, according to officials familiar with the matter.

The subpoena covered phone records from a period exceeding 24 months, reflecting a broad scope of inquiry by the DOJ. Authorities did not specify the exact timeframe or the nature of the investigation prompting the subpoena.

Jim Jordan, a Republican representative from Ohio, has been a prominent figure in congressional oversight and investigations. The request for his phone records marks a significant development given his role as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which oversees federal law enforcement agencies including the Department of Justice.

Officials said the subpoena was part of a larger probe but declined to provide further details about the investigation or how the records would be used. The DOJ’s interest in Jordan’s communications has raised questions about the intersection of congressional oversight and executive branch investigations.

Jordan has not publicly commented on the subpoena. His office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The DOJ’s subpoena of a sitting member of Congress’s phone records is unusual and highlights the complex legal and political dynamics involved when federal investigations intersect with legislative officials. Such actions typically require careful legal consideration to balance investigative needs with protections for legislative independence.

The subpoena was issued during the Biden administration, but officials emphasized that the investigation was being conducted independently of political considerations. The DOJ has faced scrutiny in recent years over its handling of sensitive investigations involving political figures.

Legal experts note that while phone records do not include the content of calls or messages, they can reveal patterns of communication and contacts that may be relevant to investigations. The extent of the data sought suggests the DOJ was pursuing a comprehensive review of Jordan’s phone activity over an extended period.

This development adds to ongoing tensions between the Justice Department and certain congressional Republicans, who have criticized the DOJ for what they perceive as politically motivated investigations. Jordan himself has been a vocal critic of the DOJ’s approach to various probes.

The subpoena underscores the challenges faced by federal agencies in navigating investigations that involve high-profile political figures. It also raises questions about how congressional oversight and executive investigations can coexist without infringing on each other’s constitutional roles.

As of now, no charges or formal allegations have been announced in connection with the subpoena of Jordan’s phone records. The DOJ continues to withhold details about the investigation’s focus and status.

The case remains an example of the ongoing complexities in the relationship between Congress and the Department of Justice, particularly in an era of heightened political polarization and scrutiny of federal law enforcement activities.