Rep. Warren Davidson sharply criticized Sen. Lindsey Graham on Friday for supporting a contentious provision that exclusively empowers senators to sue the federal government for unauthorized access to their electronic data. This privilege, notably absent for House representatives and the general public, has sparked significant controversy and accusations of legislative elitism.

Inserted by Senate Majority Leader John Thune during last week's resolution to avoid a government shutdown, the measure specifically targets senators implicated in former special counsel Jack Smith’s probe of President Donald Trump’s alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. Davidson lambasted the provision on social media, arguing that it unjustly protects senators while leaving others vulnerable. “This Senator wants the Constitution to protect him (Senators), but no one else,” Davidson posted on X, emphasizing the need to shield every American citizen.

The provision’s focus became clearer when Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley revealed in October that Smith’s investigation had accessed the phone records of nine GOP Congress members, including eight senators who can now seek damages under the new rule. However, Rep. Mike Kelly, the only House member on the list, does not qualify for such recourse.

In a striking display of bipartisan unity, the House voted overwhelmingly (426-0) on Wednesday to overturn the controversial language. Despite this decisive action, the amendment appears doomed in the Senate, where Thune has shown little concern for the internal discord it has caused within the Republican Party.

Graham, who did not respond immediately to requests for comments, has previously suggested widening the scope of the provision to include any private group investigated by Smith. In a recent Capitol Hill speech, he stated, “All of us who were wronged need to have a remedy to that wrong,” advocating for broader legal recourses to prevent future abuses.

The debate continues to unfold, highlighting deep divisions within the GOP and raising critical questions about privacy, governmental oversight, and the equal application of legal protections. As the Senate and House grapple with these issues, the outcomes could have long-lasting implications on how elected officials are held accountable and how privacy rights are upheld in the digital age.