Democrats accuse DoJ of not releasing millions of Epstein files despite legal requirement

Survivors, lawmakers and watchdog groups accused Donald Trump’s justice department of withholding records it is legally required to release following the disclosure of millions of files from the investigation into the disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The justice department on Friday released 3m pages of documents from its investigation into the millionaire financier’s sexual abuse of young girls and his interactions with wealthy and powerful figures, including Trump and former president Bill Clinton. The release was an effort to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, and, according to US deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche, includes more than 2,000 videos and 180,000 images, all subject to “extensive redactions”.

In a letter to Congress, the attorney general, Pam Bondi, and Blanche indicated that Friday’s document “marks the end” of the government’s efforts to comply with the law, drawing sharp condemnation from Democrats and the bill’s authors.

Robert Garcia, the Democratic ranking member on the House oversight committee, which has taken a lead role in investigating the government’s handling of the files release, accused Bondi of breaking the law.

“Donald Trump and his Department of Justice have now made it clear that they intend to withhold roughly 50% of the Epstein files, while claiming to have fully complied with the law. This is outrageous and incredibly concerning,” Garcia said in a statement. “The oversight committee subpoena directs Pam Bondi to release all the files to the committee, while protecting survivors.”

He added: “We are demanding the names of Epstein’s co-conspirators and the men and pedophiles who abused women and girls. We will begin a thorough review of this latest limited production, but let’s be clear: our work and investigation are just getting started.”

In a joint statement, a group of 20 Epstein survivors said the document once again shields powerful figures while exposing victims to renewed harm.

“This latest release of Jeffrey Epstein files is being sold as transparency, but what it actually does is expose survivors,” they said in the statement. “As survivors, we should never be the ones named, scrutinized, and re-traumatized while Epstein’s enablers continue to benefit from secrecy.”

They continued: “Once again, survivors are having their names and identifying information exposed, while the men who abused us remain hidden and protected. That is outrageous.”

The release came more than a month after a 19 December deadline set by the Republican-controlled Congress for the disclosures. The federal law mandating the release came after months of mounting political pressure requiring the justice department to release documents related to the Epstein investigation.

While a review of the files – the largest batch of Epstein documents to be released to date – is still underway, the public disclosure has exposed previously unknown financial ties and social connections between Epstein and prominent figures in the US and UK, including one back-and-forth email chain between Epstein and Elon Musk in 2012.

On Friday, the bipartisan sponsors of the transparency law sent a formal letter to Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general, demanding a meeting to review the un-redacted files, saying Congress cannot fulfill its oversight duties – or protect survivors – under the justice department’s current approach.

“Congress cannot properly assess the department’s handling of the Epstein and Maxwell cases without access to the complete record,” Ro Khanna, a California Democratic representative, and Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican representative, wrote to Blanche, who was previously Trump’s personal lawyer.

In a separate statement on Friday, Khanna said the partial release raises fundamental questions about DoJ’s compliance.

“The DoJ said it identified over 6m potentially responsive pages but is releasing only about 3.5m after review and redactions,” he said. “This raises questions as to why the rest are being withheld.”

Khanna said he would be watching closely for the release of specific materials he has long sought, including the FBI’s victim interview statements, a draft indictment and prosecution memo from the 2007 Florida investigation and extensive emails and files from Epstein’s computers.

“Failing to release these files only shields the powerful individuals who were involved and hurts the public’s trust in our institutions,” he said.

The justice department has argued that privacy protections, legal sensitivities and the sheer volume of material justify its approach. But critics say the law was designed to prevent selective disclosure – and the latest release has deepened concerns that survivors are paying the price for secrecy surrounding Epstein’s powerful associates.

Norm Eisen, executive chair of Democracy Defenders Fund and an Obama-era ethics lawyer, assailed the justice department for what he said was a “failure to fully release all eligible files relating to the Epstein investigation”.

“They are trying to sell this as full compliance and the ‘complete’ Epstein record,” Eisen said. “But everything about their rollout signals the same old playbook: heavy redactions, selective disclosure and a public-facing archive that does not reliably reflect what the government actually has.”