Lawmakers’ Push for Epstein Files Access Is Dealt Legal Setback

A federal judge denied a request for an independent monitor, saying he did not have the authority to supervise the Justice Department’s release of the documents.

A federal judge on Wednesday denied a request by two members of Congress that would allow them to seek an independent monitor to ensure that the Justice Department follows a law requiring it to release its files on Jeffrey Epstein.

The judge, Paul A. Engelmayer of Federal District Court in Manhattan, ruled that he did not have the authority to supervise the Justice Department’s compliance with the law, and therefore could not grant the request by the two representatives — Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky, and Ro Khanna, Democrat of California.

Mr. Massie and Mr. Khanna wrote the law, the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which was enacted in November and required the department to release the files by Dec. 19, 2025. But more than a month after the deadline, only a fraction of the millions of documents under review have been made public. The representatives, writing to the judge, said the department had “failed to meet the act’s requirements in multiple respects” and accused it of a “flagrant violation” of the law.

Judge Engelmayer said in a seven-page opinion that he had also received letters and emails from victims of Mr. Epstein supporting the representatives’ request for a neutral monitor.

The judge has overseen the case of Mr. Epstein’s longtime co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, whose files were also ordered to be released under the law.

In turning down the request by Mr. Massie and Mr. Khanna, Judge Engelmayer said the questions raised by the representatives and the victims were “undeniably important and timely.”

“They raise legitimate concerns about whether D.O.J. is faithfully complying with federal law,” the judge wrote.

But he said his role as judge in the Maxwell criminal case did not give him jurisdiction to supervise the department’s compliance with the new Epstein law, a civil statute.

Judge Engelmayer noted that Mr. Massie and Mr. Khanna could initiate a separate lawsuit that would request the appointment of a monitor, and they could use “the tools available to Congress” to seek oversight of the Justice Department’s compliance.

The representatives, in statements on Wednesday, each expressed appreciation for the judge’s consideration of their request and said they would seek to use other legal options to ensure the files are released.

“We remain determined to force the D.O.J. to follow our law using other avenues available to us and the survivors,” Mr. Massie said.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, writing to the judge on Jan. 16, had argued that the representatives did not have the standing to ask the court to appoint an independent monitor and that the judge lacked the authority to grant the request.

Ms. Bondi’s letter was also signed by her deputy, Todd Blanche, and Jay Clayton, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.

Ms. Bondi has said in letters to the judge that more than two million documents related to the Epstein and Maxwell investigations still needs to be reviewed and redacted, and that hundreds of Justice Department lawyers were involved in the process. The law mandates the redaction of names and other information that would identify victims of Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell’s sex trafficking.

Among the Justice Department employees involved in the review are almost all of the roughly 200 lawyers in the Southern District U.S. attorney’s office, The New York Times reported on Friday. Even the prosecutors involved in the case against Nicolás Maduro, the ousted Venezuelan president, have been assisting, the report said.

Michael Gold contributed reporting.

Related Content