The BareStory
Lawyers representing former Special Counsel Jack Smith have formally requested that House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan hold an open, public hearing following Smith’s private testimony this week. In a letter sent to Representative Jordan, attorneys Lanny Breuer and Peter Koski also asked for the release of the full videotape of the deposition, arguing that Smith should be permitted to address the public directly rather than having his testimony conveyed through "second-hand accounts."
Smith testified for over eight hours in a closed-door session before the Judiciary Committee on December 17, 2025. According to his legal team, Smith stood by his decisions to bring criminal charges against then-former President Donald Trump regarding the alleged mishandling of classified documents and efforts to subvert the 2020 election. The attorneys stated that Smith asserted his office possessed evidence proving Trump's criminal conduct "beyond a reasonable doubt" and that all actions adhered to Justice Department policies. The cases were ultimately dismissed due to a DOJ policy prohibiting the prosecution of a sitting president.
The deposition took place amidst intensified scrutiny from congressional Republicans, who have vowed to investigate Smith’s office. Chair Jordan has previously referred a senior member of Smith’s team for potential prosecution for failing to cooperate with the committee's probe. Conversely, Democrats, including the committee's ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin, have argued that the private nature of the deposition obscures the record. Raskin has expressed hope for a public hearing and recently suggested that Smith should also testify before a separate subcommittee investigating January 6 events. While Jordan has not ruled out a public session, the release of information remains complicated by grand jury secrecy rules and court orders.
How it may affect me
As a U.S. reader:
• You may gain direct access to Smith's testimony through a requested public hearing or video release, allowing you to evaluate his claims without relying on second-hand accounts.
• You will likely see continued government resources dedicated to congressional investigations into the Special Counsel’s office, including probes into alleged non-cooperation by staff members.
• Your access to the full record of the proceedings may be delayed or limited by grand jury secrecy rules and court orders that currently restrict the release of information.
• You are observing the practical application of DOJ policies preventing the prosecution of a sitting president, which serves as the confirmed legal basis for the recent case dismissals.
