Jack Smith is a veteran American prosecutor whose career spans federal law enforcement, public-corruption investigations and international war-crimes cases. His name became nationally prominent after Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed him special counsel in November 2022 to oversee two federal investigations involving Donald Trump. Smith returned to the national spotlight in September 2026 when he appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee and defended the decisions that led to the two federal cases against Trump.
Smith’s career extends well beyond the Trump investigations. Before becoming special counsel, he held senior Justice Department positions, worked at the International Criminal Court in The Hague and led prosecutions involving alleged war crimes in Kosovo. His September 2026 Senate testimony has now placed his professional record, investigative methods and prosecutorial decisions under renewed congressional scrutiny.
Jack Smith’s Background and Legal Career
Smith built his career as a prosecutor rather than as an elected official or political operative. He began working in criminal prosecution in New York before moving into federal law enforcement.
His early work included cases involving violent crime, sex crimes and other serious offenses. He later joined the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, where he held senior positions in the criminal division.
That experience eventually brought Smith to the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, one of the department’s most sensitive prosecutorial units.
The Public Integrity Section focuses on federal investigations involving public corruption and misconduct by public officials. Smith became its chief in 2010 and remained in the position until 2015.
The assignment gave him experience handling cases where political considerations could become a significant public issue. Smith later pointed to that background when defending his independence during his Senate testimony.
Smith’s International Prosecutorial Experience
Smith’s career also includes substantial international experience.
He worked at the International Criminal Court in The Hague from 2008 to 2010. His responsibilities included coordinating investigations involving alleged international crimes, including war crimes and crimes against humanity.
His international career continued when he became the specialist prosecutor for the Kosovo Specialist Chambers in 2018.
The Kosovo court investigates serious crimes connected to the conflict in Kosovo during the late 1990s. Smith’s office pursued cases involving senior political and military figures, giving him additional experience with investigations involving powerful public officials.
That work was among the factors that established Smith as a prosecutor with experience handling politically sensitive and highly consequential cases.
Smith’s Return to U.S. Justice Work
Smith returned to domestic federal law enforcement after his international assignments.
He served as acting U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee in 2017 after previously working as first assistant U.S. attorney in the district.
After leaving government service, Smith worked in the private sector. His career therefore included experience in local prosecution, federal prosecution, international criminal investigations and private litigation before he was selected to become special counsel.
Why Merrick Garland Selected Jack Smith
Garland appointed Smith special counsel on November 18, 2022.
At the time, Trump had already announced his campaign to return to the White House. The Justice Department was investigating two separate matters involving him.
One investigation focused on efforts surrounding the 2020 presidential election and the transfer of presidential power. The other concerned classified documents that federal investigators said had been retained at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property.
Garland’s decision was intended to place the investigations under the leadership of a special counsel who could exercise a degree of independence within the Justice Department.
Smith inherited investigations that were already underway and subsequently became responsible for decisions about charging, litigation and the presentation of evidence to grand juries.
The 2020 Election Investigation
One of Smith’s major assignments involved Trump’s actions after the 2020 presidential election.
Federal prosecutors investigated efforts to prevent or delay the certification of Joe Biden’s victory and the transfer of presidential power.
The investigation examined several issues, including efforts involving alternate slates of electors, pressure on state officials and actions surrounding the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
In August 2023, Smith’s office obtained a federal indictment charging Trump with four felony counts.
Trump pleaded not guilty and denied wrongdoing. His legal team argued that the prosecution was politically motivated and challenged the government’s interpretation of the events surrounding the election.
Smith’s prosecutors maintained that the evidence supported the charges and that the case concerned criminal conduct rather than ordinary political disagreement.
The Mar-a-Lago Classified Documents Case
Smith’s second major investigation centered on classified and other government documents retained at Trump’s Florida residence after he left office.
The Justice Department had been attempting to recover presidential records from Trump before the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago in August 2022.
Smith’s office later obtained a federal indictment against Trump and two co-defendants. The case included allegations involving unlawful retention of national-defense information and obstruction.
Trump pleaded not guilty and disputed the government’s allegations.
The case became another major legal battle involving questions about presidential authority, classified information, executive power and the handling of government records.
What Happened to Smith’s Trump Cases?
The legal status of Smith’s cases changed dramatically after Trump won the 2024 presidential election and returned to the White House.
The Justice Department dismissed the federal election case against Trump after concluding that its policy concerning prosecution of a sitting president prevented the case from continuing.
The classified-documents prosecution was also terminated after Trump’s return to the presidency.
Smith subsequently left the Justice Department after completing his work as special counsel.
Before his departure, he submitted his final report concerning his investigations. The Justice Department preserved the report as part of the official record of the special counsel’s work.
Smith’s departure did not end political and congressional debate over his investigations. Republicans continued to question whether his office had exceeded its authority, while Democrats and Smith defended the investigations as legitimate law-enforcement actions.
Why Jack Smith Testified Before the Senate in 2026
The latest major development came on September 29, 2026, when Smith appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The hearing was formally focused on allegations concerning Smith’s authority and the targeting of Republican officials and individuals during his investigations.
Republican senators questioned Smith about investigative techniques, subpoenas, congressional records, financial information and the overall conduct of his special counsel operation.
Democratic senators challenged the criticism and questioned Republican lawmakers about their characterization of Smith’s investigations.
Smith repeatedly defended his work.
During his opening statement, he said he was not a politician and had no partisan loyalty. He maintained that prosecutors should base decisions on facts and law rather than a person’s political affiliation, prominence or position.
He also said he stood by the decision to prosecute Trump.
The Congressional Phone Records Dispute
One of the major issues at the hearing involved phone records obtained during Smith’s election investigation.
Smith’s team obtained non-content telephone records connected to several Republican lawmakers and other individuals. The records showed information such as the participants in calls, the duration of calls and when communications occurred.
Republican senators argued that obtaining the information represented an improper intrusion into congressional activity.
Smith defended the investigative step, saying the records were relevant to determining how Trump and others sought to influence events following the 2020 election.
He also said his team consulted Justice Department officials about the subpoenas.
Another issue concerned nondisclosure orders associated with some subpoenas. Smith said investigators had reason to believe that disclosure of investigative steps could result in evidence being destroyed or the investigation being obstructed.
The dispute remains one of the central issues surrounding congressional scrutiny of Smith’s tenure.
Eric Schmitt’s Questioning of Smith
The Senate hearing also produced one of its most widely discussed exchanges when Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri questioned Smith about his whereabouts during February 2024.
Schmitt attempted to connect Smith to an Atlanta Hawks basketball game and suggested that the information raised questions about Smith’s earlier testimony.
Smith denied traveling to Atlanta for the event.
He explained that he had actually attended a University of Iowa women’s basketball game against Maryland in College Park, Maryland. Iowa’s team is known as the Hawkeyes.
The confusion centered on the similarity between the words “Hawks” and “Hawkeyes.”
Schmitt continued questioning Smith and accused him of dishonesty. Smith maintained that the Atlanta allegation was incorrect.
The exchange quickly became a major talking point from the hearing, overshadowing portions of the broader discussion about Smith’s investigations.
Jamie Raskin Reacts to the Schmitt Exchange
The basketball exchange also triggered a response from Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat.
Raskin sharply criticized Schmitt’s questioning and said the senator had “basically disgraced himself” during the exchange.
The comment reflected Raskin’s assessment of the hearing and became part of the political reaction surrounding the testimony.
Other lawmakers also questioned Schmitt’s interpretation of the basketball evidence. Sen. Amy Klobuchar pointed out during the hearing that Iowa’s team is the Hawkeyes rather than the Hawks.
The episode illustrates how quickly individual moments from congressional hearings can become major news stories, particularly when testimony involves allegations of dishonesty or misconduct.
Did Smith Say He Is a Republican or Democrat?
Smith has consistently presented himself as a nonpartisan prosecutor.
During his September 2026 Senate testimony, he emphasized that his career included service under both Republican and Democratic administrations. He said his prosecutorial decisions would have been the same regardless of the political affiliation of the person being investigated.
Smith’s public career has therefore been defined primarily by prosecutorial appointments rather than elected political office.
His investigations of Trump have inevitably placed him at the center of partisan conflict, but his professional role was that of a Justice Department prosecutor and special counsel.
The distinction is important when assessing claims about his political identity. Criticism or support for Smith’s investigations does not itself establish a political-party affiliation.
What Is Jack Smith Doing Now?
Smith is no longer employed as special counsel and is not currently leading a federal investigation into Trump.
His September 2026 appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee was a major public return after leaving the Justice Department.
The hearing demonstrated that congressional scrutiny of his former investigations remains active. Republican lawmakers continue to raise questions about subpoenas, investigative tactics and the scope of his authority, while Democratic lawmakers have defended the underlying investigations and questioned the basis of attacks against Smith.
Smith’s testimony also made clear that he continues to stand behind the central prosecutorial decisions made during his tenure.
Why Smith’s Career Continues to Draw Attention
Smith’s importance in American public life comes from the unusual combination of his prosecutorial background and the historic nature of the cases he handled.
He was not a career politician. Instead, his professional path took him through local prosecution, federal public-integrity enforcement, international criminal investigations and senior Justice Department roles.
That background eventually placed him in charge of investigations involving a former president who later returned to office.
The cases themselves ended after Trump’s return to the presidency, but the questions surrounding Smith’s work have continued into 2026.
His Senate testimony has now added a new chapter to that story. Lawmakers are examining how his team operated, what investigative authorities it used and whether those decisions were justified by the evidence available at the time.
For readers searching who is Jack Smith, the most important facts are his long prosecutorial career, his international legal experience and his role as special counsel in the two federal investigations of Trump. His latest Senate appearance has renewed attention on both his professional record and the continuing political dispute over the investigations he led.
Stay informed as the congressional scrutiny of Jack Smith and the latest developments surrounding his testimony continue to unfold.