Lindsey Graham Halts Repeal That Could Net Senators Millions—What’s Behind the Block?

South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham on Thursday single-handedly derailed a bipartisan effort to strip a lucrative lawsuit clause from last week’s government-shutdown compromise, intensifying a Capitol Hill fight that could shape the 2026 campaign landscape. Graham objected to unanimous consent on a House-passed repeal bill, preserving language that lets any senator sue the Justice Department for up to $500,000 per violation if investigators obtain their phone or email records without advance notice. The measure applies retroactively to 2022, when special counsel Jack Smith subpoenaed Graham’s phones in the 2020 election probe, potentially entitling him to “tens of millions,” he boasted on Fox News earlier this week. House Democrats and more than two dozen Republicans voted Wednesday to kill what they call a “cash-grab carve-out,” arguing that taxpayers shouldn’t bankroll windfalls for lawmakers. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) echoed that view on the Senate floor, blasting the clause as “outrageous damage provisions that were retroactively put into statute”. Graham, a close ally of former President Donald Trump, countered that the Justice Department “crossed a constitutional red line” by seizing congressional data. “This was people in the Senate believing what happened to the Senate need never happen again,” he said, adding that any payout would compensate for an alleged violation of separation-of-powers protections. He also signaled plans to sue Verizon for cooperating with investigators, underscoring a broader GOP push to deter tech-company compliance with federal subpoenas. Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) tried to salvage the repeal effort by proposing that any damages be forfeited to the U.S. Treasury, framing the fight as “accountability, not profit,” but Heinrich rejected the compromise. The stalemate now moves to negotiations scheduled for early December as Congress races to finish must-pass defense and tax bills. Political strategists see risk for Graham, who faces voters next November in a battleground South Carolina primary. Ethics-watchdog ads are already portraying the senator as cashing in on legislation he helped write. Yet conservative donors praise Graham for “standing up to Biden’s Justice Department,” suggesting the controversy could energize the right-leaning base. Telecom firms and civil-liberties groups are closely monitoring the dispute, warning that retroactive liability could chill cooperation with law-enforcement subpoenas and spur a wave of privacy-related litigation across other branches of government. With holiday recess looming, Senate leaders must decide whether to force a roll-call vote that would put every member on record—an outcome Democrats welcome. For now, the payout provision remains law, and Graham is already drafting his complaint, setting up a high-stakes legal showdown that could redefine the balance between congressional privilege and criminal inquiry.