Members of the US Congress are threatening legal repercussions against the Department of Justice after it failed to comply with a law requiring the full disclosure of documents related to the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The deadline passed on Friday without complete transparency, prompting bipartisan outrage and promises of action from lawmakers.
Legal Threats Meet Institutional Hurdles
Several legal experts have confirmed that Congress possesses tools to challenge the DoJ's non-compliance, but they highlight a significant paradox. The very department accused of flouting the law holds the authority to prosecute any contempt charges arising from the dispute.
Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor, explained that Congress could vote to hold officials like Attorney General Pam Bondi or her deputy, Todd Blanche, in contempt. "But the matter would be referred to the Department of Justice, which would not prosecute," Rahmani stated, adding, "It's theoretically possible, but practically it's not going to happen."
A more plausible route, according to Rahmani, would be for Congress to file a lawsuit asking a federal judge to compel the document release. Failure to obey a court order could result in a contempt of court ruling. However, enforcement would again typically fall to the DoJ, creating a circular problem.
Potential Avenues: Contempt, Prosecution, and Impeachment
Eric Faddis, a former prosecutor and trial attorney, outlined additional mechanisms. If DoJ officials violated the Epstein Files Transparency Act, Congress could hold them in contempt. The Sergeant at Arms could then detain them until compliance, though this is a rarely used power.
Faddis also noted that an investigation could expose officials to potential federal charges for obstruction of Congress, concealment of records, or evidence tampering. Furthermore, Congress could attempt to impeach Bondi or Blanche, though such a move would require substantial political will.
John Day, another former prosecutor, pointed to a fundamental flaw: the law itself may lack a clear enforcement mechanism. "I think an actual prosecution would be unlikely because the law, as passed, did not contain any enforcement mechanism for violations," Day said.
Bipartisan Fury and a Controversial Partial Release
The legal discussions follow statements from Congressman Ro Khanna, a Democrat from California, and his Republican co-author of the Epstein Act, Thomas Massie from Kentucky. They confirmed they are "exploring all options," including impeachment and contempt proceedings, after Friday's deadline was missed.
Massie suggested future DoJ officials could prosecute current ones, as the Act does not expire like a congressional subpoena. The controversy has ignited anger across the political spectrum, including among a segment of Donald Trump's own supporters who believe Epstein operated with impunity due to powerful connections.
The DoJ released a limited batch of files on Friday. Appearing on NBC's Meet the Press, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche defended the partial disclosure, citing the need to protect victims' identities. "Imagine if we had released tons of information around victims. That would be the true crime," Blanche argued.
The issue intensified when the Associated Press reported that at least 16 files had vanished from the DoJ's website post-release. These included a photograph showing Donald and Melania Trump with Epstein and his former associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, who was later convicted of sex trafficking. Blanche dismissed suggestions the removal was to shield the President as "laughable," noting the friendship was already public knowledge.
Donald Trump, who promised during his 2024 campaign to release the files, has yet to oversee a full disclosure since taking office in January. He has denied any wrongdoing related to Epstein, claiming he ended their friendship years before the financier's crimes became known. Epstein died in a jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial during Trump's first term.
