Epstein Files Transparency Act

Long title	To require the Attorney General to release all unclassified documents and records in possession of the Department of Justice relating to Jeffrey Epstein, and for other purposes.
Announced in	the 119th United States Congress
Number of co-sponsors	24[a]
Citations
Public law	Pub. L. 119–38
Legislative history
Introduced in the House as H.R.4405 by Ro Khanna (D-CA-17) on July 15, 2025 Committee consideration by House Judiciary Committee; passed via discharge petition on November 12, 2025. Passed the House on November 18, 2025 (427–1) Passed the Senate on November 19, 2025 (Unanimous consent) Signed into law by President Donald Trump on November 19, 2025

The Epstein Files Transparency Act is a law passed by the 119th United States Congress and signed by President Donald Trump on November 19, 2025. It requires the United States attorney general to "make publicly available in a searchable and downloadable format" all files pertaining to the prosecution of the deceased child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein (if needed, declassifying them to the extent possible) within 30 days of passage, and then to give the Judiciary Committees in both the House of Representatives and the Senate an unredacted "list of all government officials and politically exposed persons" named in the files.

In September 2025, Representative Thomas Massie, a member of the Republican Party, filed a discharge petition in support of the bill. On November 12, the discharge petition received the minimum-required 218 signatures needed, from 4 Republican representatives and 214 Democratic Party representatives, forcing a House vote on the bill.

The House of Representatives voted 427–1 to pass the act on November 18, 2025, with Republican representative Clay Higgins casting the lone nay vote.^[1] The next day, the Senate passed the bill via unanimous consent, and Trump signed the bill into law.^[2][3][4][5] The law gave the attorney general 30 days to release the documents.^[6]

On December 19, the U.S. Department of Justice released the first batch of Epstein files,^[7] violating U.S. law in failing to release all the files by that day. This failure received bipartisan criticism.^[8][9] Many documents contained extensive redactions, with hundreds of pages entirely blacked out.^[10][11] Following a delayed and heavily criticized rollout,^[12] the Department of Justice released additional files in waves,^[7] with a final release on January 30, 2026. Following this, the Department claimed they had fufilled their legal obligation and released all available files, amounting to over 3.5 million pages.^[13][14] This announcement received political push-back, with some reports indicating the full Epstein files consist of over 6 million pages.^[15]

The release of the Epstein files led to the resignations of figures including Miroslav Lajčák and Peter Mandelson; as well as potential contempt of congress charges against Bill and Hillary Clinton, following a House investigation into the former's relationship with Epstein.

During the 2024 presidential election, the Republican nominee and former president Donald Trump, when asked by Rachel Campos-Duffy on Fox News in June 2024 whether he would release the Epstein files as president, answered "yeah, I would."^[16] In September, while appearing on Lex Fridman's podcast, Trump promised to release the Epstein files if elected.^[17] Trump won the 2024 election in November.

In February 2025, the U.S. attorney general, Pam Bondi, stated in a Fox News interview that the Epstein client list was "sitting on my desk right now to review."^[18] Later that month, the White House gave binders to several prominent conservative and right-wing figures, including Liz Wheeler and Scott Presler, reading "Epstein Files: Phase 1" and "Declassified". Later that day, Representative Anna Paulina Luna criticized the event, stating that they released "old info".^[18]

On July 7, Bondi released a statement saying that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) found "no incriminating 'client list'", contradicting her February statement. That day, DOJ and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) announced that no further files from the Epstein investigation would be released.^[18] Bondi's statement drew outrage from conservative figures; Wheeler called it "unforgivable behavior", while the Hodgetwins called for Trump to fire Bondi.^[19]

On July 11, reports emerged that Dan Bongino, the deputy director of the FBI, had a heated confrontation with Bondi over her handling of the files, and was considering resigning.^[20] Bongino was later demoted to Co-Deputy Director on September 15, 2025;^[21] he later announced his upcoming resignation on December 17, 2025.^[22]

On July 12, Trump defended Bondi and referred to Epstein as "somebody that nobody cares about." On July 16, Trump referred to the Epstein files as "a big hoax."^[23] On July 23, reports emerged that earlier in May, Bondi and her deputy Todd Blanche informed Trump that his name was "among many in the Epstein files." Trump denied this report.^[18]

Trump's change in position drew criticism from prominent podcasters close to Trump, as well as many conservatives. Joe Rogan accused the Trump administration of gaslighting the public, while Andrew Schulz said Trump was "insulting our intelligence".^[24]

In August 2025, Judge Paul A. Engelmayer denied Bondi's request to unseal grand jury files from the Ghislaine Maxwell prosecution case.^[18]

On September 2, 2025, (the first day the House was back in session after the August recess) Representative Thomas Massie moved to force the House to vote to require the Justice Department to release the files, through a discharge petition.^[25] Trump and other Republicans launched a pressure campaign to prevent the release of the files, with one anonymous official calling voting for Massie's discharge petition a "very hostile act to the administration".^[26]

Within several days, Nancy Mace, Lauren Boebert, and Marjorie Taylor Greene signed the discharge petition, alongside many Democrats.^[27] Later that month, Greene tweeted: "The Epstein rape and pedophile network must be exposed. ... Release all the Epstein information by any means possible." She added that "if something happens to me, I ask you all to find out" who might be trying "to stop the information from coming out."^[28]

On September 9, the House Rules Committee rejected a motion 8-4, from Democratic representative Jim McGovern, to request to vote on the Epstein Files Transparency Act in the House, along party lines.^[29]

The petition's final two signatures came from Democrats: James Walkinshaw, who won the Virginia 11th District special election on September 9^[30] and was sworn in the next day, and Adelita Grijalva, who won the Arizona 7th congressional district special election on September 23^[31] and was sworn in on November 12.^[32]

In the hours before Grijalva was sworn in, Bondi, Blanche, and FBI director Kash Patel met with Boebert regarding the House effort. However, Boebert did not remove her name from the petition, and once Grijalva was sworn in and provided the 218th signature, it was no longer procedurally allowable for any signatories to remove their names.^[33][34][35]

Mike Johnson, the speaker of the House of Representatives, had delayed Grijalva's swearing-in, generally attributing his decision to the 2025 government shutdown, arguing that the House could not swear in new members during pro forma sessions or during a government shutdown. However, some critics noted that Johnson had sworn in two Republican members, Jimmy Patronis and Randy Fine, during a pro forma session in April.^[36] On October 21, the Arizona attorney general, Kris Mayes, sued Johnson, seeking to force him to swear in Grijalva.^[37] That day, Johnson told Fox Business that the delay "has zero to do with Epstein", given that "the Epstein files are being released"^[38] (seemingly referring to the House Oversight Committee's releases).

On November 12, 2025, Johnson stated that the House would vote on the bill the following week (November 16–22).^[39]

In the following days, Republican representatives Don Bacon,^[40] Andy Biggs,^[41] Rob Bresnahan,^[40] Tim Burchett,^[40] Eli Crane,^[42] Warren Davidson,^[43] Carlos A. Giménez,^[44] Nicole Malliotakis,^[44] Max Miller,^[43] and Derrick Van Orden,^[44] none of whom signed the discharge petition, stated that they will vote in favor of the legislation. Representative María Elvira Salazar stated when asked that she was still "thinking" over her vote.^[45]

Politico reported that, according to anonymous sources, over 100 Republicans were expected to defect from Johnson and vote for the bill.^[40] Representative Ro Khanna predicted that 40–50 Republicans might vote for release, while Massie similarly anticipated that Republican support could "snowball",^[46] later predicting a deluge of "100 or more" Republican votes.^[47]

On November 15, Trump ordered the DOJ to investigate Epstein's involvement with banks and prominent Democratic figures, including Bill Clinton, Lawrence Summers, and Reid Hoffman. On Truth Social, Trump wrote: "This is another Russia, Russia, Russia Scam, with all arrows pointing to the Democrats". Bondi subsequently assigned the investigation to U.S. attorney Jay Clayton.^[48]

On November 16, Massie commented on the DOJ's new investigation ordered by Trump, saying:

The president's been saying this is a hoax. He's been saying that for months. Well, he's just now decided to investigate a hoax, if it's a hoax ... I have another concern about these investigations ... If they have ongoing investigations in certain areas, those documents can't be released. So, this might be a big smoke screen, these investigations, to open a bunch of them ... as a last-ditch effort to prevent the release of the Epstein files.^[49]

Massie also added that he does not believe Trump himself is implicated in the files, but "instead is trying to protect a bunch of rich and powerful friends, billionaires, donors to his campaign, friends in his social circles".^[49]

Several hours later,^[49] Trump posted on Truth Social, reversing his stance, writing that "House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files ... it's time to move on from this Democrat Hoax".^[50] Representative Robert Garcia commented on Trump's reversal, arguing Trump was "panicking ... he is about to lose this Epstein vote to force the Department of Justice to release the files ... Trump has the power to release all the files today ... instead, he wants to continue this cover-up and launch bogus new investigations to deflect and slow down our investigation."^[51] Massie also responded, commenting that Trump "got tired of me winning."^[52]

On November 17, Trump said that he would sign the bill, but did not want it to "take it away from us". Massie responded to Trump on Twitter, writing: "Looking forward to attending this bill signing."^[53] That day, Johnson also stated that he might support it, if it could be improved in the Senate to better protect victims' identities.^[54] Additionally, on that day, Mark Epstein, the brother of Jeffrey Epstein, claimed there was an active coverup to "sanitize" the files by "scrubbing the files to take Republican names out." Mark Epstein claimed he had heard as such from a "pretty good source" and it was the reason for Trump's sudden shift on releasing the files.^[55][56][57]

On November 18, Massie, Khanna, and Greene hosted a press conference at Capitol Hill alongside Epstein abuse survivors.^[58]

The U.S. House of Representatives voted on the act on November 18, 2025, just before 3 p.m. Eastern Time. The bill was considered by the House "under a suspension of rules", meaning it required a two-thirds majority (290) vote to succeed.^[59]

The vote passed 427–1. Representative Clay Higgins, a Republican, was the lone vote against the bill, arguing that the release of the identities of innocent witnesses and family members related to the case would cause undue harm.^[60] Five representatives – Democrats Don Beyer, Greg Casar, and Mikie Sherrill; and Republicans Michael Rulli and Steve Womack – did not vote on the bill.^[61][62]

After passing the House, the bill would require 60 votes to pass in the U.S. Senate.^[63] That night, the Senate unanimously agreed to pass the bill as soon as it was received from the House.^[64] The bill arrived in the Senate on November 19 and was formally transmitted from the Senate to the President's desk that morning.^[65]

Trump stated on November 17, 2025, that he would sign the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law if it reached his desk.^[66] House speaker Mike Johnson, who had previously expressed staunch opposition to the release of the files, said on November 18: "I am deeply disappointed in this outcome. ... It needed amendments, I just spoke to the president about that. We'll see what happens."^[67][68] A presidential veto did not occur, but it could have been overridden had both chambers voted by a two-thirds majority, which they had easily reached in the previous votes on the act.^[69]

The act reached the presidential desk on the morning of November 19.^[4] A senior White House official had told reporters that "the bill will be signed whenever it gets to the White House". In the evening, the White House told reporters that Trump would not appear on camera for the rest of the day,^[70] after which Trump announced on Truth Social that he had signed the bill into law.^[5]

On November 19, Bondi said that the Department of Justice had obtained "new information" about Epstein that could potentially justify withholding the release of certain files.^[71]

Her statement led to public warnings from Republican senators, including Thom Tillis, Lisa Murkowski, and John Kennedy, who advised her to avoid withholding files. Murkowski warned Bondi that Americans will feel "duped" if files are withheld, while Tillis stated that "You can adjust for whatever investigations are going on, but if you do a blanket hold, I think that they're going to have a lot of people angry."^[72] Democratic senators also began to publicly criticize Bondi, with Peter Welch predicting that Bondi would work to conceal files.^[72]

That week, Bondi also filed an expedited motion in the U.S. District Court of Southern Florida for the release of grand jury transcripts in the Epstein case.^[71]

On November 26, U.S. district court judge Richard M. Berman ordered the Department of Justice to describe, by December 1, which materials it possesses and how it will protect survivors' privacy.^[73]

On December 5, Judge Rodney Smith ordered the release of Florida grand jury transcripts, determining that the Epstein Files Transparency Act overrode a law prohibiting the release of grand jury materials.^[74]

On December 16, Vanity Fair published a series of eleven interviews from Chris Whipple with Susie Wiles, the incumbent White House chief of staff, from the previous several months. During the interviews, Wiles stated that Trump is named in the Epstein files, but "he's not in the file doing anything awful." Wiles also described Trump as having an "alcoholic's personality", and criticized Bondi and Patel. Following the publication, Wiles criticized the article, saying that "Significant context was disregarded". When asked about the article, Trump showed his support for Wiles, describing her as "fantastic".^[75]

On December 18, Massie released an 14-minute video covering the expected release of the files, required by the following day. Massie covered what documents are legally required to be released, stated that there are "at least 20 names of men who are accused of sex crimes in the possession of the FBI", and criticized Bondi, Johnson, and Patel for their handling of the Epstein files release.^[76]

As of November 2025, reports indicated that the Department of Justice's unreleased Epstein documents consisted of nearly 100,000 pages, as well as 40 computers, 70 CDs, 26 storage drives, and six recording devices, which contain a collective 300 GB of data.^[77]

According to The New Republic, physical evidence in the FBI's possession also includes "photographs, travel logs, employee lists...blueprints of Epstein's island and Manhattan home...a logbook of visitors to Epstein's private island, and a list [of names]".^[77]

On November 25, Jason Leopold of Bloomberg News began to report on the Epstein Files, after partially receiving redacted copies from the FBI; Leopold filed a FOIA request and a lawsuit against the FBI for the files. Leopold received a variety of files, mostly emails, which also revealed the existence of the "Special Redaction Project" (also internally referred to as the "Epstein Transparency Project").^[78] Leopold claimed that between January 2025 and July 2025, FBI personnel worked 4,737 overtime hours, costing the U.S. government over $851,000, to redact files related to the Epstein investigation.^[78]

On December 18, CNN reported that the Department of Justice was racing to quickly redact documents over the past several weeks, ahead of the December 19 deadline. The article reported that each attorney associated with the case was processing up to 1,000+ documents per week, and that "Counterintelligence specialists were asked to drop nearly all of their other work to process the Epstein documents."^[79]

According to the text of the law, the Department of Justice was legally required to release the Epstein files by December 19, 2025. However, the law does not establish a penalty for noncompliance.

On December 19, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told Fox & Friends there would only be a partial release of files that day. Blanche said the Department of Justice would release "today, several hundred thousand [files], and then over the next couple weeks, I expect several hundred thousand more."^[80]

Blanche's announcement received bipartisan criticism from politicians, and was viewed as a violation of U.S. law.^[8] Republican politicians including Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene attacked the staggered rollout of the files.^[81] Massie responded to Blanche's remarks with a photograph of the law's text on X, highlighting the requirement that all files be released within 30 days;^[7] Senator Rand Paul described the partial release as a "big mistake."^[82] Democratic politicians including Chuck Schumer,^[7] Ro Khanna,^[83] Jamie Raskin, and Robert Garcia all condemned Blanche's announcement, and threatened legal action over the decision.^[84] Legal scholar Ryan Goodman also responded, writing on X that "This is a violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act."^[7]

Democratic representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wrote on X that "Everyone involved will have to answer for this. Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, whole admin. Protecting a bunch of rapists and pedophiles because they have money, power, and connections. Bondi should resign tonight." Khanna stated that he was considering bringing articles of impeachment against Bondi,^[85] while Massie also suggested that Bondi could be charged with obstruction of justice, over her failure to release every file by December 19, 2025.^[86]

According to CBS News, the Epstein files released on December 19 total 3,965 files, at 3 GB of data.^[87] A website called The Epstein Library went live to the public, including thousands of PDFs. The site seemed to contain a search function, though HuffPost noted it was not immediately working.^[88]

Following the December 19 release, the Department of Justice received widespread criticism for the level of redaction the released files contained. Fox News reported that the Department of Justice redacted the names of "politically exposed individuals and government officials", in violation of the law. This report was disputed by Blanche.^{[91][better source needed]}

In a letter written by Blanche, obtained by Fox News, 1,200 names of victims or relatives were redacted before the files released.^{[91][better source needed]}

On December 19, CBS News reported that among the approximately 3,900 files released,^[92] at least 550 pages of documents were entirely blacked out.^[93] One 119-page file attributed to the grand jury of New York was highlighted by Ro Khanna and Chuck Schumer for being entirely redacted.^[90]

Following the December 19 release, various news outlets began analyzing the available files. The Associated Press wrote in their analysis of the files that "the mere inclusion of someone's name or images in files from the investigation does not imply [wrongdoing]."^[8]

The Associated Press reported that the files contained several photographs of former U.S. president Bill Clinton in a private plane and a hot-tub.^[8] The New York Times reported that Trump appeared only a small number of times in the released files, with the documents instead appearing to focus heavily on Clinton.^[94] The release also included photographs of Epstein with a variety of celebrities and public figures including Bill Gates,^[95] Michael Jackson, Mick Jagger,^[94] Diana Ross, Walter Cronkite,^[96] Kevin Spacey, Chris Tucker, David Copperfield, Peter Mandelson, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, Sarah Ferguson, Richard Branson,^[97] David Brooks, David Blaine, Woody Allen, and Ehud Barak.^[98]

Included was a 2003 press photo of Michael Jackson with Bill Clinton, Diana Ross, and their children — Evan Ross, Paris Jackson, and Michael "Prince" Jackson Jr. — the latter's faces redacted.^[99] Evan Ross confirmed himself and the Jackson children as in the photo. Social media users criticized the photo's redactions as unnecessary, and argued it intended to imply Ross and the Jackson children were victims and their parents questionable. White House press secretary Abigail Jackson (no relation) defended the redaction on the ground the photo featured minors.^[99]

Within a day of the release, over a dozen files were removed from the justice.gov website with no public notice or explanation,^[100] including a photo showing a picture of Trump, Epstein, and Maxwell together. It had the filename "EFTA00000468".^{[101][102][103]} Schumer highlighted that file's removal, stating; "if they're taking this down, just imagine how much more they're trying to hide... This could be one of the biggest cover ups in American history."^[104] On December 21, the Department of Justice said that out of "an abundance of caution", the Trump photo was "temporarily removed... for further review"; the photo was restored to the website later that day.^[105]

At around midnight, on December 20, the Department of Justice released some additional files containing grand jury materials, as well as flight logs with redacted names. These also included a 32-page slide presentation from 2019, as well as a FBI agent's testimony to a grand jury in 2019.^[106]

On December 22, an additional 11,034 documents were released by the Department of Justice. Within hours, the public discovered that many redactions could be easily bypassed with software like Photoshop^[107] or other basic editing tools,^[108] or by copy-pasting the seemingly redacted material to reveal the underlying text.^{[107][108][109]}

The redacted portions were found to contain significant findings as to the members and techniques of Epstein's trafficking ring, rather than only redacting the personal information of victims as permitted by the Transparency Act.^[110]

On December 23, nearly 30,000 additional files were released by the Department of Justice. With their release, the Department of Justice issued a statement claiming that "untrue and sensationalist claims made against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election. To be clear: the claims are unfounded and false".^{[111][112][113]}

Unlike the first document release, which mentions Trump in very few instances, the December 23 release mentions Trump more frequently.^[111] One case file included a direct rape allegation against Trump.^[114] An included 2020 email stated Trump had flown with Epstein "many more times than previously has been reported";^[113][111] with Trump listed as a passenger on at least eight flights on Epstein's private jet, between 1993 and 1996.

A purported postcard from Epstein to Larry Nassar was also released, dated August 13, 2019; Epstein died on August 10, 2019, three days before the letter was postmarked. Additionally, the letter's envelope contained a postmark from North Virginia, while Epstein was incarcerated in Manhattan.^[115] In the letter, Epstein allegedly wrote: "Our president also shares our love of young, nubile girls...When a young beauty walked by, he loved to 'grab snatch,'...Life is unfair".

The Department of Justice called the letter "fake", following FBI analysis, and stated it released it due to that being required by law.^[111] The existence of the letter had first been reported in 2023 by The Associated Press.^[116] Another document released showed the letter underwent a handwriting-analysis at the FBI in 2020.

Margaret Hartman of New York commented on the letter, writing "there is significant reason to doubt its legitimacy...It wouldn’t have been hard for someone to write this letter as a sick joke".^[115]

Additionally, a released document contained an unverified FBI tip, from an unnamed woman in New Mexico. The woman submitted an online tip to the FBI in August 2020, shortly before the 2020 election. The woman alleged that in 1984, she was sex trafficked by her uncle and Epstein, while pregnant at the age of thirteen. She additionally alleged that her child was killed shortly after being born in 1984, and that Trump was present for the disposal of the infant's body within Lake Michigan.^[117]

Snopes has cast doubt on the legitimacy of the accusation, noting that "the information [does] not line up with the established timeline of Trump's friendship with Epstein." Snopes noted that the woman alleged that the incident occurred in 1984, while Trump and Epstein did not meet until years later in the late 1980's; additionally, there is no evidence or documentation of Trump or Epstein having ties to the town.^[117]

Axios reported on December 24 that there were 700,000 files remaining which were expected to be released by December 30.^[118] Later that day, other outlets reported the Justice Department had yet to internally review and redact over a million files and said it "may take a few more weeks" to release them^[119][120] as it sought U.S. attorneys to volunteer over Christmas to remotely do this work.^[121] On December 30, The New York Times reported that the Department of Justice was reviewing as many as 5.2 million files.^[122] On January 5, the Department of Justice said in a court filing that it had reviewed "12,285 documents (comprising 125,575 pages)" but had yet to review at least 2 million documents.^[123] The letter also referenced an additional report, which separately suggested more than 5 million documents could be under review.^[124]

In early January 2026, less than 1% of the files were publicly released according to a DOJ letter sent to U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer.^[12] On January 8, 2026, Khanna and Massie wrote to Judge Engelmayer, "to suggest the appointment of a Special Master and Independent Monitor" so as to force the Justice Department to produce the remaining files.^[124][125] On January 16, Bondi and Blanche filed a six-page letter to Engelmayer, asking him to deny the Special Master request.^[126] On January 21, Engelmayer denied the special master request.^[127]

On January 30, 2026, the U.S Justice Department released 3.5 million Epstein Files documents, with U.S. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche also alleging that these documents were the last remaining Epstein Files documents which had yet to be made public.^[128] According to Blanche, the release of these files brought the U.S. Department of Justice in compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.^[14] Unlike previous releases, the Justice Department's webpage cannot be accessed until visitors agree they are at least 18 years old, due to the inclusion of pornography within the released files.^[129] A document from the release, titled EFTA01660679, appeared to be removed,^[130] but was reportedly restored after a period of overload.^[131]

Files unveiled in the January 30 release entail a variety of images, reports, documents, emails, and claims including:

• Dan Ariely - Email correspondence between Epstein and the Israeli-American professor, who appeared to have maintained a six-year friendship from 2010 to 2016.^[132]
• Ehud Barak - Revelations that the Israeli Prime Minister and his wife, Nili Priel, stayed in an New York apartment owned by Epstein on multiple occasions.^[129]
• Richard Branson - A 2013 email from Branson to Epstein, reading, "It was really nice seeing you yesterday...Anytime you're in the area would love to see you. As long as you bring your harem!"^[133]
• George H.W. Bush - A 2019 FBI document, from a purported male Epstein victim, who accused former Presidents Bush and Bill Clinton of raping him on a yacht cruise, in 2000 and that current president Donald J. Trump along with his wife Melania Trump were also present on the yacht. The man also alleged he witnessed babies being dismembered, as well as ritualistic sacrifices. The document includes a note from federal authorities attached to the case, who noted at the time that no evidence was provided by the alleged victim to verify his claim.^[134]
• Bill Clinton - An October 2009 email from Peggy Siegal, stating that Clinton and Jeff Bezos visited Epstein's house in 2009.^[135]
• Bill Gates - Two 2013 emails that Epstein sent to himself, alleging that Gates had "sex with Russian girls" that gave him a sexually transmitted infection, which required antibiotics to treat.^[135]
• Thorbjørn Jagland - Revelations that the Norwegian Prime Minister had once planned a family vacation on Epstein's private island, before later cancelling it.^[136]
• Jay-Z - An unverified FBI report, from an unnamed caller, alleged that she was drugged, and handled by rapper Pusha T, before later waking up in a room with Jay-Z and Harvey Weinstein present.^[137]
• Dean Kamen - A 2013 email detailing Kamen's plans to spend a night on Epstein's island.^[138]
• Miroslav Lajčák - Emails between Epstein and Lajčák, where the two discussed young women. This led to Lajčák's resignation.^[139]
• Howard Lutnick - Emails that showed that Lutnick was invited to have lunch with Epstein in 2012; Lutnick has previously stated that he severed ties with Epstein in 2005.^[135]
• Peter Mandelson - Documents showing Epstein had sent Mandelson money, between 2003 to 2004.^[140]
• Ashley Massaro - An anonymous 2020 complaint, submitted to U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss, accusing Massaro of working for Ghislaine Maxwell. No evidence against Massaro was submitted alongside the complaint.^[141]
• Ghislaine Maxwell - The public release of Maxwell's 2020 mugshot.^[135]
• Mette-Marit, Crown Princess of Norway - Email exchanges between Epstein and the Crown Princess from 2011 to 2014. Following the release, she apologized for her "poor judgement".^[136]
• George J. Mitchell - Email communication between Epstein and Mitchell in 2013. Mitchell had previously been accused having sex with an Epstein victim in 2019.^[142]
• Narendra Modi - A 2017 email from Epstein revealing that he advised Modi to visit Israel, for political purposes. Epstein wrote, "The Indian Prime Minister Modi took advice. and danced and sang in Israel for the benefit of the US president. They had met a few weeks ago. IT WORKED".^[143]
• Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor - A photograph of Mountbatten-Windsor, which appear to show him kneeling over a woman lying on the ground.^[144]
• Elon Musk - Email correspondence between Musk and Epstein, including a 2012 email from Musk asking Epstein when the "wildest party on your island" will be.^[135]
• Christopher Poole - Email correspondence between Epstein and Boris Nikolic claiming that the former had personally met Poole (referred to by his online handle, "moot") and "drove him home." Other correspondences claim that Epstein motivated Poole to establish the /pol/ board on 4chan.^[145]
• Steven Sinofsky - Email communication between Epstein and Sinofsky, the latter of whom sought business advice from Epstein.^[146]
• Steve Tisch - Email correspondence between Epstein and Tisch, where they discussed introducing women to the latter.^[135]
• Donald Trump - An FBI report, citing a "credible" source, claiming that Trump has been "compromised by Israel".^[147]
• Brian Vickers - Email correspondence between Epstein and Vickers, dating back to 2012. Vicker's ex-wife, Sarah Kellen, has previously been accused of having ties to Epstein's sex-trafficking.^[148]
• Casey Wasserman - Email correspondence from 2003, between Maxwell and Wasserman. Wasserman wrote to Maxwell, stating how he missed her and wished to see her in a tight leather outfit, while Maxwell offered Wasserman a massage that can "drive a man wild". Wasserman publicly responded to the files' release with regret, apologizing for his association with Maxwell, while distancing himself from Epstein and maintaining his innocence.^[149]
• Les Wexner - Documents covering Wexner's attempts to hire a criminal defense attorney, following FBI efforts to serve him a 2019 subpoena due to his ties to Epstein.^[150]

Additional information revealed in the files include:

• An email from Microsoft that reveals Epstein was permanently banned from Xbox Live in December 2013.^[151]
• An unknown individual, who texted Epstein in June 2014, writing: "I give you permission to kill him. He is apparently with Olga. He lied to you and he lied to me."^[152]
• A 2011 email from Epstein, revealing plans to help seize Libya's frozen state assets, estimated by Epstein at $80 billion. Epstein sought the help of British and Israeli intelligence to help seize the funds, in exchange for a "10 percent to 25 percent" compensation fee.^[153]

U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna expressed skepticism of Blanche's claim, noting that the U.S. Department of Justice had in fact "identified over 6 million potentially responsive pages."^[154][15] On February 1, 2026, Khanna repeated threats to charge Bondi with contempt of congress.^[139] Rep. Thomas Massie responded to earlier criticism and efforts to stop the files' release, writing on X, "It was not a hoax, I cannot be bullied, I am not done, and this is why those in power are doing everything in their power to defeat me."^[155]

U.S. President Donald Trump argued that the final file release "absolves" him of any wrongdoing.^[139]

A group of Epstein victims issued a statement criticizing the release's partial failure to redact or hide the names of some victims, writing, "As survivors, we should never be the ones named, scrutinized, and retraumatized while Epstein's enablers continue to benefit from secrecy".^[156] A review from the Wall Street Journal found the names of 43 out of 47 victims in the files, left unredacted.^[157]

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer suggested that Mountbatten-Windsor should testify before U.S. Congress, due to his presence within the files.^[144] Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre agreed with Mette-Marit, Crown Princess of Norway's statement that she had "poor judgement", following further light on her association with Epstein. Støre similarly criticized former Prime Minister Thorbjørn Jagland.^[136]

On January 21, 2026, Democratic Rep. Summer Lee introduced a congressional amendment to hold Pam Bondi in contempt of congress, accusing her of "failing to comply" with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Lee's amendment ultimately failed along party lines, 19–24.^[158]

Following the partial release of some Epstein files, the Republican-led House Oversight Committee summoned Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton to testify before the committee. Bill Clinton has appeared in several photos with Epstein released in the files, and maintained a relationship with Epstein in the 1990's and early 2000's.^[158] Emails from 2011 and 2015 which were released in November 2025 revealed that Epstein personally denied that Bill Clinton ever visited his island.^[159][160]

In January, the Clintons announced that they would refuse to comply with a congressional subpoena, regarding an investigation into their ties to Jeffrey Epstein. In a statement, the Clintons called the committee's efforts "legally invalid". Following this, Oversight Chair Rep. James Comer announced that he would begin contempt of Congress proceedings into the Clintons the following week. Comer added that "No one's accusing the Clintons of any wrongdoing. We just have questions."^[161]

On January 21, 2026, the House Oversight panel voted 34–8 to advance a motion to hold Bill Clinton in contempt of congress; and 28-15 on the measure towards Hillary Clinton. Nine Democrats, including Lee, voted with Republicans to hold Bill Clinton in contempt, while three of the nine also voted in favor of the measure directed towards Hillary Clinton.^[158]

Following the success of the Oversight panel's votes, a vote may now be undertaken by the full House of Representatives. If a vote were to pass in the full House, a referral would be sent to the Department of Justice.^[162] According to Politico, an estimated 12 to 15 Democrats intend to vote with Republicans, when a full House vote materializes.^[163] Following this, the Department of Justice could then begin to weigh prosecution against the Clintons.^[162]

Former U.S. Attorney John P. Fishwick Jr. alleged that the Clintons are "in a very difficult position, because these cases are very straightforward." Fishwick compared the Clintons' actions to Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, who were both indicted and imprisoned for contempt of congress.^[164] Legal expert Ross Garber further alleged that the Clintons possess no legal defense for their actions, and should seek a deal to avoid federal prison.^[165] However, some of the Epstein Files documents which were released on January 30, 2026 revealed that Bill Clinton's ties to Epstein were previously investigated by the FBI, which even determined that some allegations against Clinton were unverified and not credible.^[166][167] Epstein was also revealed to have been asked to testify about his relationship with Clinton during a deposition which took place during Virginia Giuffre's lawsuit in September 2016, during which he invoked the Fifth Amendment.^[168][169]

On February 1, 2026, the board of FIRST placed Founder and President Dean Kamen on immediate leave, following the appearance of his name in the January 30th file release.^[138] In a statement, Kamen stated "Jeffrey Epstein reached out to me to become involved in my projects to bring clean water and distributed power to developing countries...Given what I know now, I of course regret even those limited interactions".^[138]

Slovakian National Security Advisor Miroslav Lajčák resigned from office, following the release of the January 30, 2026 files. In a statement, Lajčák denied any wrongdoing, and stated that he chose to resign to avoid hurting Prime Minister Robert Fico.^[139]

On February 1, 2026, Lord Peter Mandelson also resigned his membership from the UK's Labour Party, following the January 30th document release. Files released by the Department of Justice showed that Epstein paid Mandelson $75,000 (£55,000), across three payments, between 2003 and 2004.^[140] In a public statement, Mandelson said, "Allegations which I believe to be false that [Epstein] made financial payments to me 20 years ago, and of which I have no record or recollection...While doing this I do not wish to cause further embarrassment to the Labour Party and I am therefore stepping down from membership of the party." Mandelson is now set to be summoned before U.S. Congress to testify.^[170]

The US–Ireland Alliance also announced that they would rename the Mitchell Scholarship. The scholarship derives its name from U.S. Senator George J. Mitchell, whose connections with Epstein were further exposed by the document release.^[142] A statement was released on Mitchell's behalf, arguing that Mitchell "had no knowledge of Epstein's actions involving underage girls".^[142]

In an opinion article in The Hill, journalist and attorney Chris Traux argued that the Epstein files were "a political albatross hanging around [Trump's] neck", while being Trump's equivalent of the Hillary Clinton email controversy. Traux also argued that the bill's overwhelming success in Congress showcased the weakened influence of Trump's political power.^[171] Contributor A. Scott Bolden similarly argued in The Hill that Trump's initial opposition to the bill proved to be a failure, while arguing that Bondi's new investigations were Trump's eleventh-hour attempt to withhold select files.^[172] Contributor John Mac Ghlionn also argued in The Hill that Trump's initial failure to release the Epstein Files could "destroy whatever legacy he hoped to leave behind"; and is partially responsible for the increasing popularity of far-right commentator Nick Fuentes, a critic of Trump.^[173]

Journalist Harrison Berger in The American Conservative argued that the bill granted too much power to Bondi to redact content while releasing the Epstein files. Berger argued that the Trump administration would likely abuse the bill's provision in order to hide Epstein's political and foreign ties. For example, Berger pointed to Drop Site News's report that Epstein worked on Israel's behalf with Ehud Barak during the Syrian civil war, in order to help remove Bashar al-Assad from power.^[174]

A September 2025 Marist Poll, surveying 1,477 adult Americans, found that 90% of Americans answered that they wanted at least some of the Epstein files released, with the victims' names redacted. Among these surveyed, 77% stated that they wanted all of the Epstein files to be released, 13% wanted some of the files released, and 9% were opposed. Additionally, 84% of Democrats, 67% of Republicans, and 83% of independents answered that they wanted all of the Epstein files to be released.^[175]

A December 2025 Economist/YouGov poll, surveying 1,591 Americans, found that 55% of Americans disapproved of Trump's handling of the Epstein investigation, while only 26% approved. Additionally, the poll found that 91% of Democrats, 78% of Independents, and 74% of Republicans supported releasing the Epstein files.^[176]

A January 2026 Economist/YouGov poll, surveying 1,546 Americans, found that 56% of Americans disapproved of Trump's handling of the files, while 25% approved. Additionally, 49% of Americans answered that Trump is attempting to cover up Epstein's crimes, while 30% answered that he is not.^[177]

A January 2026 CNN poll, surveying 1,209 adult Americans, found that only 6% said they’re satisfied with what the federal government had so far released. Nearly half of Republicans, three-quarters of independents, and 9 in 10 Democrats said the government was withholding information.^[178]

• "Epstein didn't kill himself"
• Executive Order 14176
• President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992