‘Too many redactions’: Lawmakers say Epstein file release does not meet their requirements

Lawmakers said the Justice Department’s release Friday of a limited and heavily redacted portion of its case files on Jeffrey Epstein violates the law and they are considering their options, including impeachment for possible obstruction of justice.

“We have not seen the draft indictment that implicates other rich and powerful men who were on Epstein’s rape island, who either watched the abuse of young girls or participated in the abuse of young girls and the sex trafficking,” Rep. Ro Khanna, California Democrat, said in a video posted to social media.

Mr. Khanna, who authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act with Kentucky GOP Rep. Thomas Massie, said not only was the release incomplete but it contained “too many redactions.”

“Thomas Massie and I are exploring all options,” he said. “It can be the impeachment of people at Justice, inherent contempt, or referring for prosecution those who are obstructing justice. We will work with the survivors to demand the full release of these files, to demand justice.”

Congress passed a law last month that required Attorney General Pam Bondi to make public “all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials” in the Justice Department’s possession that relate to Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who were respectively indicted and convicted of sex trafficking minors.

Friday was the law’s deadline for the files to be released. The Justice Department posted hundreds of thousands of documents to its website, but lawmakers said the release excludes key information they were seeking.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche had warned Friday morning that the Justice Department would not be able to release all of the documents by the deadline, but he promised more would be released after reviews to ensure protections for victims.

Impeachment is a high bar because it requires an indictment from a majority of the House and a conviction from two-thirds of the Senate.

Inherent contempt is a rarely used oversight power Congress has to fine or detain officials who violate the law.

Referring Ms. Bondi or others for prosecution obviously would have no impact because she leads the department that would be making those decisions.

Mr. Massie said on social media that Ms. Bondi and Mr. Blanche failed to comply “with both the spirit and the letter of the law” and agreed with the sentiments Mr. Khanna shared in his video.

Mr. Khanna cited a 119-page document from a New York grand jury that was totally blacked out as an example of the heavy redactions.

“This despite a federal judge ordering them to release that document, and our law requires them to explain redactions,” he said. “There’s not a single explanation for why that entire document was redacted.”

California Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that is undertaking its own Epstein investigation, said his team has begun “a major review” of the files “but it’s clear that this is not a full release.”

He and other Democrats have said they would consider litigation to force the Justice Department to release the remaining files.

Other Democratic lawmakers attacked Ms. Bondi for defying the law.

“If she is as committed to justice, transparency, and the rule of law as she claims, the files would be in our hands punctually and in their entirety,” said California Rep. Doris Matsui.

Sen. Adam Schiff, California Democrat, called for an inspector general investigation of the Justice Department’s handling of the document release and for Ms. Bondi to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.