On September 11, my paperwork went to Washington. Here is what it says, and what happens next.
I wrote about it previously here: Jack Smith FISA-ed Me! - I'm in Arctic Frost 4x
I mailed two envelopes, certified, return receipt requested. One went to the Department of Justice. The other went to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Inside were two claims.
- The first is an administrative tort claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
- The second is a claim under a specific provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, 18 U.S.C. section 2712, which Congress wrote for exactly this situation: a United States person whose communications were used unlawfully under FISA.
Both claims say the same thing.
During Operation Arctic Frost, the government used a foreign intelligence authority, Section 702 of FISA, against a United States person in a domestic investigation. My claim alleges there was no foreign intelligence predicate for it, that databases were queried with my identifiers, that what came back was kept and shared, and that it was used against me in the criminal case that followed. The law requires minimization. It requires a warrant. Neither was present.
I want to be precise about what I am and am not saying. This is a claim, not a verdict. The government has not answered it. Nothing is proven yet, and I am not pretending otherwise.
What the record already shows. I first learned any of this on April 23, 2026, when the Senate Judiciary Committee published its compilation of the subpoenas issued in the Arctic Frost investigation. My name appears four times, in four separate subpoenas aimed at the financial records of the Trump committees: Save America Joint Fundraising Committee, Save America, MAGA PAC, and Trump Make America Great Again Committee. In all four, my name sits on the same list of January 6 defendants that the government requested.
Why the paperwork comes first. Congress built a process, and I am following it. Before a citizen can sue the United States on a claim like this, the claim must be presented to the agency, and the agency gets six months to act on it. That is what the mailing was. If they deny it, the next step is federal court. If they ignore it, the law treats that as a denial, and the next step is still federal court.
The part that should trouble you, regardless of what you think of me. The whole investigation happened in the dark. That is the design. You cannot challenge a search you are never told about, and you cannot defend yourself against material you cannot see. The concealment is not a side effect of the surveillance. It is what makes the surveillance work.
What I am asking for. Two things. A finding that the law was violated. And compensation for what it cost: my work, my defense, and the years. The statute requires a claimant to state a sum certain, and mine is $2,000,000. I would rather have the years back.
What I am not doing. I am not asking for anyone to be arrested. I am not threatening anyone. I am not claiming a victory I have not won. I am asking a court to look at the record and say whether this was lawful.
Why this is bigger than one man. A foreign intelligence authority exists to watch foreign adversaries, not to build cases against American citizens for their politics. When that line is crossed and then hidden, every American's Fourth Amendment interest is diminished, not just mine. That is what the Founders warned about, and it is why the Fourth Amendment was written in plain language that even a government lawyer can read.
What happens next. Six months, give or take. I will report whatever comes back, including silence, because the silence is part of the story. If it goes to court, you will hear about it here first.
I have been quiet about the details for a long time. I am not going to be quiet about this.