Appropriations Committee funding for law enforcement is being diverted to fund Jack Smith’s political prosecution of President Trump
WASHINGTON—United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, today forced consideration of his amendment that would prohibit the law-enforcement funding provided by the Committee from being defunded at Jack Smith’s request—without committee approval—and diverted to fund his political prosecutions of President Donald Trump, the Republican presidential nominee.
Preliminary estimates indicate that Smith has purloined nearly $30 million in funds allocated to law enforcement without the Committee’s approval. In Fiscal Year 2023 alone, more than $11 million in funds allocated to law enforcement were diverted in this manner. Complete data is not yet available for Fiscal Year 2024, but that total is likely more given Smith’s escalating prosecutions and recent court losses.
Yet, rather than ensure that taxpayer dollars allocated for law enforcement are used in accordance with Congressional direction to prosecute dangerous criminals instead of political candidates, all Senate Appropriations Democrats blocked Hagerty’s amendment.
Remarks as prepared for delivery:
Thank you, Chair Murray and Vice Chair Collins, and Chair Shaheen and Ranking Member Moran.
My amendment poses a simple question: Who has the final say over our bill—the Committee or Jack Smith? More specifically, will this Committee allow Jack Smith to override its judgment—without our approval—and defund the resources we provide for real law enforcement against dangerous criminals?
In Fiscal Year 2023, more than $11 million in funds provided by this Committee for law enforcement were diverted to Jack Smith’s investigation of the Republican presidential candidate.
For Fiscal Year 2024, the Department of Justice hasn’t yet reported these numbers, but given Jack Smith’s election-year escalations—and repeated defeats in court—this diversion of law enforcement funds is no doubt even worse this fiscal year. That means less money for law enforcement.
My amendment is simple: it would prohibit the law-enforcement funding provided by this Committee from being defunded at Jack Smith’s request—and without the Committee’s approval.
My amendment would protect the constitutional prerogative of this Committee over the resources we provide.
In my view, Jack Smith should not have the power to override this Committee and co-opt for his political prosecutions the resources provided for the U.S. Marshals Service and FBI.
The question is simple: Do you support protecting the role of this Committee and closing the trapdoor that’s allowing Jack Smith to defund our law enforcement resources?
My amendment will ensure that the law enforcement resources this Committee provides go toward stopping dangerous criminals—not presidential candidates.
I ask for a roll call vote and urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Thank you.
###