Judge Presses DOJ to Explain Withheld Epstein Files Materials

A federal judge on Thursday pressed Justice Department lawyers to explain why certain materials from the Jeffrey Epstein files were withheld from the public, in a hearing tied to a lawsuit filed by an independent journalist.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan scheduled the hearing after the journalist alleged the DOJ made improper redactions and withheld materials related to Epstein, the late convicted sex offender.

In June, Sullivan ruled that the redactions and withheld materials violated the Epstein Files Transparency Act, ordering the DOJ to either release the materials or justify withholding them. "The Attorney General has conceded that he is in violation of the Act," Sullivan wrote at the time.

Rather than turning over the materials, the DOJ has spent recent weeks trying to justify the redactions. Unsatisfied with some of those explanations, Sullivan called Thursday's hearing to question department lawyers directly.

The judge said the DOJ has not documented that lawyers representing victims or potential victims actually requested that certain people be treated as victims, one basis the department cited for redactions.

Sullivan also raised concerns about handwritten notes from an interview with a woman who made unsubstantiated allegations against President Donald Trump, who has denied any wrongdoing. The DOJ withheld the notes, arguing they were "substantially similar to" FBI reports of the interview that were already released, and that releasing them risked exposing victim information.

But Sullivan noted the transparency law contains no exception for documents deemed "substantially similar" or duplicative, pointing out the DOJ has released comparable versions of other documents. He wrote that the department must "explain why the handwritten notes cannot be redacted manually, or why the redactions cannot be accomplished in another way."

The DOJ maintains all its redactions were lawful and has asked for a two-month delay in the case. "The Department has not knowingly violated, nor has it ever acknowledged violating, the EFTA as it continues working to comply with statutory requirements," DOJ lawyers wrote in a court filing.