TN news outlet wins court battle for records about seizure of Rep. Andy Ogles’s cell phone

The public could soon have greater insight into the basis for the federal government’s prior seizure of a sitting congressman’s personal cell phone and the contents of his email account after Reporters Committee attorneys representing Scripps Media successfully challenged the secrecy surrounding the case.

On Sept. 4, a federal judge ordered the unsealing, pending potential redactions, of search warrant materials connected to a 2024 investigation into alleged campaign finance violations by U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles, a Tennessee Republican. Ogles, who has not been charged with a crime, has claimed the investigation was motivated by political bias.  

The ruling came about a month after Paul McAdoo, Reporters Committee’s Tennessee-based attorney, filed motions to intervene and unseal the warrant materials on behalf of Scripps Media, which owns NewsChannel 5 in Nashville. 

The FBI seized Ogles’s personal cell phone and information from his email account in 2024, but the U.S. Justice Department agreed not to review the evidence while Ogles challenged the seizure. In May 2026, the Justice Department appeared to drop the investigation, agreeing to “return or destroy” Ogles’s property. 

Still, the search warrants and their associated filings remained sealed, which means the public couldn’t see for itself how the government — and the court — determined there was probable cause to believe that a search of the congressman’s property would turn up evidence of a federal crime. 

Scripps argued that the public has a common-law right of access to the filings, and the public’s need for transparency is “particularly pronounced” because the warrants concern a public official’s campaign for public office. The news outlet also argued that because Ogles has repeatedly called into question the government’s motivations for the search, the public has a strong interest in “evaluating potential misconduct by law enforcement.”

U.S. Magistrate Judge Luke A. Evans sided with Scripps, rejecting Ogles’s arguments that unsealing the records could harm his privacy interests. Judge Evans ordered the government to propose redactions to the warrants before unsealing the filings.  

This unsealing is the latest positive outcome in Reporters Committee’s broader litigation efforts to push the Justice Department for greater transparency when it investigates sitting public officials. 

In recent years, Reporters Committee attorneys have litigated five cases challenging the government’s attempt to shield information about investigations of sitting members of Congress. In all but one of them, their efforts have resulted in the unsealing of court records and, in some cases, powered important investigative reporting that has helped shed light on the government’s actions.