The original sponsors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act say they’re weighing aggressive steps—including potential articles of impeachment—against senior Department of Justice officials after the DOJ released a heavily redacted set of Epstein-related records on Friday.
Why It Matters
Representatives Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, and Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, co-sponsored legislation requiring the DOJ to release all files tied to the federal investigation of disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, declined to bring the bill to the floor, prompting Khanna and Massie to pursue a discharge petition. That effort reached the required 218 signatures once the government shutdown ended in mid-November, forcing a vote.
After the bill passed with near-unanimous support, the DOJ was legally required to release the files by December 19. Instead, the department released only a portion, saying additional redactions were needed to protect the identities of victims or minors and to avoid jeopardizing any ongoing investigations—exceptions permitted under the law.
What To Know
Critics argue the DOJ’s redactions went well beyond what is necessary and that the limited release violates the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law after it passed Congress with overwhelming support.
During a press call on Friday, Khanna said he and Massie would “explore all options” to ensure the DOJ complies, adding that impeachment hearings could be considered “if it gets to that.”
“We could hold them in inherent contempt of Congress. Again, if it gets to that,” Khanna said. “We could refer Justice Department officials for criminal prosecution, if it looks like they have engaged in excessive redaction or tampering, and we can support lawsuits to abide by the law.”
Khanna also said lawmakers have been in contact with survivors and their attorneys and are considering bringing survivors back to Capitol Hill to demand compliance with the statute.
Meanwhile, calls for Attorney General Pam Bondi’s impeachment and removal have gained traction on social media following the release.
What People Are Saying
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in response to a request for comment: “The Trump Administration is the most transparent in history. Attorney General Bondi is doing an excellent job delivering on the President’s promises. If these Democrats cared about truth and transparency they would be demanding answers from Bill Clinton, Hakeem Jeffries, and Stacey Plaskett.”
Representative Thomas Massie wrote on X on Friday: “Attorney General Pam Bondi is withholding specific documents that the law required her to release by today.”
Representative Adelita Grijalva wrote on X on Friday: “Today, I’m thinking about survivors like Liz Stein and Jess Michaels, whose persistence and courage are the only reasons why Congress acted to force the DOJ to release the Epstein files. They deserve justice, accountability, and closure. Anything less is an insult.”
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote on X on Friday: “The whole point was NOT to protect the ‘politically exposed individuals and government officials.’ That’s exactly what MAGA has always wanted, that’s what drain the swamp actually means. It means expose them all, the rich powerful elites who are corrupt and commit crimes, NOT redact their names and protect them.”
Former Representative Justin Amash wrote on X on Friday: “Impeach and remove [AG Pam Bondi].”
Don Winslow wrote on Friday: “Impeach and remove [AG Pam Bondi].”
Christopher Webb wrote on X on Friday: “Say it with me: IMPEACH PAM BONDI Every member of Congress voted to release the Epstein files except for one holdout. The DOJ blew the legal deadline because they’re running cover for Trump. Bondi broke the law.”
What Happens Next
Khanna said attorneys are reviewing the released material and that, so far, he has not seen much that is new.
The DOJ has said additional files will be released. Under the law, the department must also provide Congress with an explanation for any photos or documents it chose to redact.
