Topline
The House will vote on a second part of the Epstein Files Transparency Act when it reconvenes after the election after the bill’s sponsors got enough support from other lawmakers to force a vote, they said Thursday, potentially paving the way for more files to be released and for states and Epstein victims to take action against Epstein’s high-profile friends.
Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., right, and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., speak after reviewing unredacted portions of the Epstein files, on February 9 in Washington D.C.
CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Key Facts
Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said Thursday they’ve secured enough signatures to force a vote on the Epstein Files Transparency Act II, with enough lawmakers signing a “discharge petition” that allows a bill to skip the normal procedure of having to go through a committee first and instead go straight to the House floor.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act II is a follow up to the original Epstein Files Transparency Act, which was enacted last year and forced the Justice Department to release thousands of Epstein-related documents.
But the Trump administration has still been criticized for not going far enough: The DOJ has come under fire for not releasing all of the relevant documents and overly redacting some that have been made public, including hiding the names of apparent Epstein associates, and New Mexico has sued the DOJ for not sharing information to help its investigation into Epstein’s dealings in the state.
The legislation would give state attorneys general and Epstein victims the right to sue the federal government for improperly withholding, concealing or redacting Epstein documents, making it easier to compel the government to release additional Epstein files and potentially helping states bring additional charges against Epstein’s associates.
It also gives members of Congress broad rights to challenge any Epstein-related documents the DOJ is keeping secret, saying lawmakers are allowed to accuse the attorney general of withholding any Epstein-related material, and can then sue the AG if they don’t either turn over the document or provide a legal justification for why it’s withheld within 30 days.
If government officials withhold, alter or misrepresent any Epstein files, the bill would make that a criminal offense that could be punishable by a fine or imprisonment.
What to Watch for
While the discharge petition means the bill is guaranteed to get a vote on the House floor, it remains to be seen if it will pass and if it could have enough support to make it through the Senate. Massie and Khanna face a tight deadline to get the Epstein Files Transparency Act II through Congress, given this congressional term will end in early January. Massie will leave Congress when his term expires, meaning the bill might not have enough support to pass if it gets reintroduced during the next term.
What Would The Epstein Files Transparency Act II Do?
The bill gives states and Epstein victims the right to sue the government for Epstein materials that may be withheld or redacted, and states that victims and state prosecutors are entitled to see unredacted Epstein files that are relevant to their investigation or specific allegations. Victims are not allowed to receive documents with identifying information about other victims besides themselves. It also gives lawmakers the right to challenge any withheld Epstein files, and provides that the government must turn over specific unredacted Epstein files to lawmakers for their own private review within seven days of the request being made. If passed, the legislation could pave the way for additional Epstein associates to potentially face prosecution, by making it easier for states to investigate them, and would give victims additional transparency into what materials about them were in Epstein’s possession. It also paves the way for additional documents to be made public, both through the congressional requirements and because the bill specifies that any documents turned over to states can be publicly disclosed in court. Any disclosed materials would still have to follow the Epstein Files Transparency Act’s requirements for what has to be redacted, however, such as victims’ information or information that could compromise national security.
Which Lawmakers Are Supporting The Epstein Files Bill?
Discharge petitions need 218 lawmakers to sign on to them to bring a bill to the House floor. Democrats have 214 seats in the House, and have all been expected to sign on to the discharge petition and support the bill. Massie said Thursday the petition has now also gotten support from four Republicans, including himself, meaning it now has the 218 signatures necessary to move forward. The Republicans supporting the bill, besides Massie, are Reps. Ralph Norman, R-S.C.; Nancy Mace, R-S.C., and Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa.
Why Is The Bill Necessary?
New Mexico has already filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge to force the DOJ to turn over unredacted Epstein files to state prosecutors, alleging the federal government has refused to share documents without providing adequate legal justification. New Mexico prosecutors have faced “sustained resistance” from the DOJ when it comes to information-sharing practices that have happened regularly in past investigations, the lawsuit alleges, and the state claims the Trump administration’s stonewalling “actively harms victims and undermines the public interest.” The DOJ has defended their actions, claiming they are not allowed to provide “victim-identifying information carte blanche, and New Mexico has provided no lawful basis to justify such sweeping disclosures.” The federal government otherwise “remains available to assist New Mexico’s investigation consistent with the law and binding court orders,” a DOJ spokesperson said in August. Epstein victims have sued the government for improperly disclosing their information in the Epstein files, and have also sued Epstein’s estate to find out if their images were included in Epstein’s collection of child sex images. The victims alleged in their lawsuit that “few if any” victims of Epstein’s abuse “have been notified that Epstein had their unlawful sexualized images” by law enforcement, and are bringing the lawsuit to determine whether their images are in the Epstein files so they can take additional legal action if necessary. The Epstein Files Transparency Act II would give victims an opportunity to also seek that information directly from the government.
Contra
One area that wouldn’t be helped by the new Epstein bills are foreign investigations into the late financier, which are also appearing to hit a snag amid the DOJ’s alleged failure to share information. Multiple foreign officials have said the Trump administration has not responded to their requests for Epstein-related information as they look into potential abuse that may have happened within their borders, and The Telegraph reported last month the U.K.’s criminal investigation into former U.S. Ambassador Peter Mandelson was at risk of falling apart because of the DOJ’s alleged unwillingness to hand over unredacted Epstein files. Sources cited by The Telegraph suggested the Trump administration was “reluctant” to share files that could be damaging to President Donald Trump, though the Washington Post noted foreign information-sharing requests can also take some time to process just due to administrative delays. The DOJ previously told The Telegraph the agency “has not refused to assist any jurisdiction investigating potential criminal conduct related to Jeffrey Epstein” and “remains committed to cooperating with all jurisdictions pursuing potential crimes.”
Tangent
The news about the new Epstein Files act comes days after Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., introduced another bill in the House that could bring additional information about Epstein and his associates to light. The bill, titled the Survivor’s Voice Protection Act, would void any NDAs that prohibit a victim or other people from disclosing incidents of sexual abuse, and would apply retroactively to NDAs signed before the legislation was passed. That would mean Epstein victims who reportedly signed NDAs with powerful friends of the late financier could come forward with new allegations, potentially exposing high-profile figures who may have been involved in Epstein’s abuse. The bill was introduced with a slate of Republican cosponsors, potentially giving it greater odds in the GOP-controlled House, but it remains to be seen if it will pass.
Further Reading
House Lawmakers Introduce Bill That Could Expose Epstein Associates’ Abuse (Forbes)
Leave a comment