The fight is not just over one document. It is over whether the public sees the evidence behind Jack Smith’s work before Republicans use his investigation as a political weapon.
Jack Smith’s secret report may be released, and that is why Trump’s Justice Department could be embarrassed. Trump DOJ’s bid to cast Joe Biden as the real villain in the Trump prosecutions fight could backfire if the withheld Jack Smith report becomes public, because the report could create political fallout around Joe Biden while also putting Donald Trump’s own alleged conduct back at the center of the story.
The fight is over Volume II of Smith’s final report, the still-unreleased section dealing with the classified documents investigation. House Judiciary Committee Democrats say the Justice Department has no remaining legal basis to keep it hidden.
The report Biden is not in
The political twist is simple: Republicans have often framed Jack Smith’s investigations as part of a Biden-era effort to weaponize the Justice Department against Trump. But the unreleased report is not, based on public descriptions, a report about Biden. It is about Trump’s handling of classified records after leaving the White House.
That matters because a public release could shift the argument away from whether Biden benefited politically from Smith’s work and back toward what Smith said his investigation found. In a December 2025 statement, House Judiciary Committee Democrats said Volume II details allegations that Trump knowingly retained presidential and highly classified records at Mar-a-Lago, defied subpoenas, obstructed law enforcement, hid evidence and lied about keeping the documents.
Those are claims from Democratic lawmakers pressing for release, not findings newly tested in court. The criminal case against Trump in Florida was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in 2024, and Trump has denied wrongdoing in the documents matter.
Still, the public fight over the report creates a problem for the Trump Justice Department. If officials want to use Smith’s investigation to attack Biden and former Justice Department leadership, critics will argue the public should see the written record Smith produced.
Why Volume II stayed hidden
Jack Smith was appointed special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland on November 18, 2022, according to the Justice Department. His office investigated two major Trump-related matters: efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the retention of classified documents at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida.
Volume I of Smith’s final report, released by the Justice Department in January 2025, addressed the 2020 election investigation. Reuters reported at the time that Smith concluded Trump engaged in an “unprecedented criminal effort” to hold on to power after losing the 2020 election.
Volume II, covering the classified documents investigation, was not released in full. The stated reason, according to the House Judiciary Democrats’ account, was the need to protect pending proceedings involving Trump’s two co-defendants in the Florida case.
That rationale is now the pressure point. Judiciary Democrats say the Trump Justice Department dismissed the proceedings against those co-defendants in February 2025, leaving no legitimate reason to continue withholding the report. The department has not, in the materials provided, publicly accepted that argument.
Smith testimony raises the stakes
The timing is not accidental. House Judiciary Democrats said their renewed demand came ahead of a closed-door deposition of Smith before the House Judiciary Committee scheduled for December 17, 2025. They also said Judiciary Republicans subpoenaed Smith after rejecting his offer to testify publicly.
That sets up an awkward contrast. Smith may be asked to defend or explain his work in private while the report memorializing that work remains unavailable to Congress and the public. Democrats argue that allows Republicans to question the prosecutor while keeping the underlying record out of view.
Their letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi accused the administration of hiding the report while claiming transparency. They also said Democrats were supporting a legal challenge in United States v. Trump before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
For Republicans, the closed-door format could provide a chance to press Smith on investigative decisions, contacts with Biden-era officials and the broader claim that Trump was unfairly targeted. For Democrats, the same deposition is a lever to demand the report’s release.
The Biden angle cuts both ways
The reason Biden remains politically central is not because Volume II appears to be about him. It is because the Trump camp has long argued that the prosecutions of Trump were infected by politics during Biden’s presidency.
That argument has resonance with Trump’s supporters, especially after years of congressional investigations into what Republicans describe as federal law enforcement bias. A withheld report gives them room to argue that the public has not seen the full picture of Smith’s decisions.
But withholding can also feed the opposite narrative. If the Trump Justice Department keeps Volume II sealed while attacking the investigation, Democrats can argue officials are selectively using secrecy: enough disclosure to criticize Biden and Smith, not enough disclosure for voters to evaluate the evidence.
That is the possible backfire. A report meant to stay offstage could become the main event, and a Biden-focused political attack could reopen public attention on the classified records allegations against Trump.
What the public already knows
The Justice Department’s public record confirms Smith’s role and the existence of his final report process under federal special counsel regulations. Volume I is public. Volume II is the contested document.
The released Volume I shows how damaging a special counsel report can be even when no trial follows. Reuters’ account of the January 2025 release highlighted Smith’s conclusion that Trump engaged in an unprecedented effort to overturn the 2020 result. Trump and his allies rejected Smith’s work as politically motivated.
The documents case followed a different path. Cannon dismissed the indictment, finding Smith’s appointment unlawful. That ruling was sharply disputed by legal observers and prosecutors, but it prevented the case from moving to trial before Trump returned to office.
Because there was no trial, Volume II could become the most complete public narrative of the classified documents investigation if it is released. That is why both sides care so much about whether it remains sealed.
What remains unclear
Several important questions are still unresolved. It is not clear when, or if, a court will allow broader release of Volume II. It is also unclear whether any release would be heavily redacted to protect classified information, investigative methods or third-party privacy interests.
Smith’s deposition could also change the politics without producing much public clarity. If it remains closed, lawmakers may emerge with competing descriptions of what he said, while voters still cannot compare those claims with the full report.
The Justice Department also faces an institutional choice. Keeping the report hidden may protect sensitive material and avoid relitigating a dismissed case. Releasing it may reduce accusations of selective secrecy but could revive damaging allegations against the president.
That is why the report’s potential release carries more than archival value. It could determine whether the next phase of the Smith fight is about Joe Biden’s Justice Department, Donald Trump’s conduct, or the Trump DOJ’s willingness to let the public read the record for itself.
Leave a Reply