The whole Signal chat of the "Houthi PC Small Group" is now on the public record. Jeffrey Goldberg, of Atlantic magazine, tried to get the participants, or the Trump administration, to admit that it was national security information, and therefore he should keep it secret, but they just shined it on like it was no big thing.
Everybody who wasn't a participant in the chat knows that it was national security information that should have been kept secret, as well as the fact that it should never have been done on a phone app in the first place.
Named as defendants are Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, John Ratcliff the Director of the CIA, Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent, Secretary of State and Acting Archivist of the United State Marco Rubio and the National Archives and Records Administration. Didn't know about Rubio's second job before.
The defendants are accused of violating the Federal Records Act 44 U.S.C. 3101, and the Administrative Procedures Act (PDF) also 5 U.S.C. § 551-559.
In the suit, American Oversight explains that most of their activity is by using the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, to keep track of government actions and accountability.
Until I saw a screenshot, I didn't know that Bessent was in on the chat. It's another one of those "why are they in this chat to begin with?" questions.
The suit goes for two and a half pages about the Federal Records Act and the Administrative Procedures Procedures Act, with the relevant sections quoted that have been violated.
Then they lay out the facts, which have been enumerated elsewhere. What's new is that American Oversight filed a Freedom of Information Act request on January 28th, 2025, for Department of Defense records for all individuals, including explicitly Signal records, for the period between January 25th and January 27th. They got a tracking number and the request is still under review. They go into to a little bit about how Signal records disappear, and therefore it's use does not comply with the Federal Records Act. They filed another one on February 4th and give the detail on the back and forth on tracking numbers and following through.
They filed still another one on March 18th. Then they go back to January 30th. That one was looking for all DOGE records.
Another one on February 28th was looking for all Treasury communications, and that's where Scott Bessent comes into the lawsuit in addition to being in on the chat.
Another good point that they make is that it's illegal to destroy a document once it's been requested under the Freedom of Information Act. It's amazing that they were requesting information that included Signal logs way before the Houthi chat. It's as if somehow American Oversight already knew Signal was being used illegally.
They point out that the use of Signal was to circumvent the use of email which is always required to be archived.
As an example supporting their claims of misuse of Signal they quote Pete Hegseth from March 24th saying, "... nobody was texting war plans, and that's all I have to say about that." The second half is also what Forrest Gump said to the lady on the park bench. Probably didn't say it in quite the same way.
In describing what American Oversight wants as relief, as in winning the case, they spend a whole page saying that everyone should have known better about preserving records.
Sure enough, they bring up the October 2023 Department of Defense memorandum that instructs that Signal and any other "... unmanaged 'messaging apps' are not authorized to access, transmit, process non-public DoD information."
"Defendants have failed to perform their nondiscretionary duties to preserve and recover the unlawfully removed records." They also need to inform the Archivist of NARA of their failure, who right now is Marco Rubio, one of the defendants.
They have also failed to notify the Attorney General of their failure of non-discretionary duties.
"Defendants' failure to act constitutes a final agency action for which there is no other adequate remedy in a court of law. Moreover, it is an agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed, and it is also arbitrary, capricious, an abusive discretion, and otherwise not in accordance with law."
That was all in Count One of the suit. Count Two rips apart Marco Rubio and his responsibility for NARA not getting the recordings and NARA itself for their transgressions in failing to do their job properly in six short paragraphs.
Then comes the Prayer for Relief:
1. Declare that the Signal chat is subject to the Federal Records Act.
2. Declare that the failure to preserve records is a violation of the FRA.
3. Declare that the Defendants have maintained an inadequate record keeping system under the FRA.
4. Declare that the Defendants have failed in their respective duties under the FRA and the APA.
5. Issue an emergency injunctive relief requiring the defendants to do their job with proper record keeping now and for the whole matter to be referred to the Attorney General to see that proper record keeping is done in the future and everything done to recover the missing records now.
6. "Issue emergency injunctive relief and a permanent injunction ordering defendants to preserve all materials relating to Plaintiffs claim under the FRA."
7. Award American oversight attorneys fees and any other litigation costs.
8. Grant any other relief the court deems is appropriate.
Filed on March 25th.
The memorandum in support of the TRO lays out the sequence of events and the lies that have been told publicly by the chat group. It's 25 pages, and lays out the events from their legal point of view. It's a good and necessary read unless you can get past the paywall for the Jeffrey Goldberg's articles. On page 11, American Oversight says why the injunction should be given, in just the heading for the rest:
"American Oversight is likely to succeed on the merits because defendants have not met their obligations under the FRA and because Defendants' use of Signal with auto-delete violates the FRA."
That goes on till page 23, where they say no bond should be required. Remember that Federal Civil Procedures Act section 65(c) that Trump's lawyers pulled out of thin air? A judge can grant a request or not grant the request by the government. Grant it with a $0 bond or $1. It's up to the judge, not the government. They say it would "defy logic" to ask for any bond when there is obviously no financial burden on the government about missing records.
Their conclusion says that the temporary restraining order should be issued and that the defendants should stop destroying any records and get to work recovering the ones they have.
They have a case that wins on the face of it. Trump has played dumb about the whole fiasco until last night when he heard that Judge Boasberg had been assigned the case and lashed out on Truth Social.
American Oversight's suit could be one of many. The participants could easily be charged with violating the Espionage Act, but that would have to be brought by the DOJ, and Pam Bondi isn't going to do that.
Probably the same for violating the Federal Records Act. 18 U.S.C 2071 has a penalty of up to $5,000 and/or up to three years in prison.
The Administrative Procedures Act doesn't lay out any penalties itself. Those are dependent on how the violation is done.
The only thing citizens can bring against this violation of common sense are limited to civil suits, unless the government wants to prosecute one of its own. Considering who the people, are that seems highly unlikely.
There is, however, nothing to prevent anyone else from filing a civil suit against the group for non-retention of records through the Freedom of Information Act, the Federal Records Act, and the Administrative Procedures Act, or actually seeking monetary damages. The American Oversight suit only asks for costs in processing the litigation.
I am going to predict that this will start a group of lawsuits on the same topic. There could be one just about the use of Signal by the government without even referencing the Houthi chat.
We already know that Judge Boasberg does not like to be lied to or insulted by the Department of Justice lawyers. American Oversight could win, I think, without the case even being tried. Right now they are asking for a temporary restraining order. When they get that, we'll see what else they are going to ask for.
According to Trump himself, this is round four of him going against Judge Boasberg.
Round five coming up.
