A shutdown-ending bill’s payout clause for subpoenaed GOP senators triggers internal revolt, backlash, and momentum for repeal in the House.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune believed he had handed his Republican colleagues a political shield — even a reward — when he tucked a provision into the government funding bill that would allow subpoenaed senators to sue the federal government for at least $500,000 if their electronic records were seized without notice during Special Counsel Jack Smith’s probe into Donald Trump’s 2020 conduct.
But instead of gratitude, Thune walked straight into a political firestorm. Most of the eight Senate Republicans targeted by Smith’s subpoenas are refusing to commit to the payout, wary of accusations that they engineered a taxpayer-funded windfall for themselves.
Only Sen. Lindsey Graham enthusiastically embraced the idea — declaring he would not settle for “a million dollars” and vowing to make the DOJ’s investigation “so painful no one ever does this again.”
The rest? Far more cautious.
Sen. Josh Hawley blasted the provision as “a bad idea,” insisting the proper response to what he calls Biden-era “abuses” is oversight, hearings, and accountability — not personal compensation. Several others offered vague or lukewarm reactions, with many distancing themselves from the entire episode.
The backlash has been so intense that House Republicans erupted in anger, prompting Speaker Mike Johnson to pledge a rapid repeal vote — one expected to pass with overwhelming bipartisan support. Johnson reportedly confronted Thune directly, expressing strong disapproval over the provision’s inclusion.
Further complicating matters is confusion about who actually requested the controversial language. A source familiar with internal discussions says Senate Republicans themselves pushed for the clause, fueled by a desire to fight back against what they call the weaponized “Arctic Frost” investigation targeting GOP lawmakers.
Yet that very push is now haunting them.
Rep. John Rose, running for Tennessee governor, immediately introduced legislation to dismantle the payout mechanism. His primary rival, Sen. Marsha Blackburn, said she would vote to undo the language — though she still wants legal recourse against those she accuses of targeting conservatives.
Other senators are desperately trying to sidestep the controversy:
• Sen. Ron Johnson said he has “no plans” to sue.
• Sen. Hagerty flatly rejected taking taxpayer money.
• Sen. Sullivan insists he didn’t even know the provision was in the bill.
• Sen. Lummis supports the language but denies involvement in crafting it.
• Sen. Tuberville blasted Biden officials online but would not say whether he’d claim the payout.
Even supporters of the provision admit it has become a political liability, blurring the line between seeking accountability and chasing government-funded damages.
Graham, however, remains defiant:
“This wasn’t about investigating Senators for crimes — it was a fishing expedition,” he said. “I’m going to push back really hard.”
The controversy now threatens to overshadow the funding package itself — and has sparked a rare, open GOP divide over how far lawmakers should go in turning investigations into political retribution.
