After Donald Trump’s justice department failed on Friday to release all documents related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein as required by law, multiple Congress members didn’t only voice outrage – they threatened legal action as well.
Several attorneys told the Guardian that those making the legal threats do have tools with which to try to follow through. But there’s a major obstacle: those with legal authority in this case are the ones accused of failing to follow the law.
Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor who started West Coast Trial Lawyers, said Congress could in fact hold Trump’s attorney general Pam Bondi or her deputy Todd Blanche in contempt. “But the matter would be referred to the Department of Justice, which would not prosecute.”
“It’s theoretically possible, but practically it’s not going to happen,” Rahmani said.
Rahmani said it was more likely that Congress would file a lawsuit asking a federal judge to compel the justice department to produce the files in question. If the justice department “refuses or fails to comply, then they can be held in contempt of court”, Rahmani continued.
“But again, the [justice department] prosecutes judicial contempt. The judge could appoint a special prosecutor, but [that] almost never happens.
“The expectation is that the [justice department] enforces the law – and that they therefore follow the law.”
Eric Faddis, founder of the Colorado law firm Varner Faddis and trial attorney who formerly worked as a prosecutor, echoed Rahmani.
If justice department officials violated the act, they can be held in contempt of Congress, which would require a vote. The sergeant in arms, in turn, could detain them until they agree to comply, he said.
“If Congress subpoenaed records from Bondi or Blanche and they didn’t comply, Congress could find them in contempt and refer that contempt to the DoJ for criminal prosecution, though that may present an inherent conflict for the DoJ,” Faddis said.
Moreover, Faddis added, if Congress investigated possible noncompliance on Bondi and Blanche, “they may be subject to federal criminal prosecution for obstruction of Congress, concealment of records, or evidence tampering”.
Faddis said Congress could also try to hold Bondi and Blanche accountable by impeaching them – though such a move would require a measure of “political will” that is easier said than done.
John Day, a former prosecutor in New Mexico who now practices criminal defense, said there could be issues with meting out punishment due to the statute itself.
“There has been some talk by congressional supporters of releasing all the Epstein files of trying to impeach Bondi and Blanche for failing to release all files on time, and for the redactions,” Day said. But Day does not see “any enforcement mechanism for violations” in the law requiring the release of the files by Friday.
“I think an actual prosecution would be unlikely because the law, as passed, did not contain any enforcement mechanism for violations,” Day said.
The remarks of Rahmani, Faddis and Day came after US House member Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, said that he and his Epstein Transparency Act co-author – Kentucky Republican representative Thomas Massie – “are exploring all options” after Friday’s deadline passed without a full release of files. Khanna confirmed those options included potentially impeaching justice department officials as well as possibly holding them in contempt of Congress.
Khanna also suggested the possibility of “referring for prosecution those who are obstructing justice”. And Massie touted potential prosecutions, too, saying future justice department officials “could convict the current AG and others because the Epstein Files Transparency Act is not like a congressional subpoena which expires at the end of each Congress”.
The justice department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Appearing Sunday on NBC’s Meet the Press, Blanche said Friday’s partial release resulted from a need to protect victims from being identified in any new documents.
“Imagine if we had released tons of information around victims,” Blanche said. “That would be the true crime. That would be the true wrong.”
Trump has been dogged by the Epstein files controversy since the summer. While he promised to release those files while successfully running for a second presidency in 2024, his administration has yet to deliver since taking office in January.
The lack of a full disclosure of those files has caused bipartisan uproar, including among a significant portion of his support base. Many far-right Trump supporters believe that Epstein, who was convicted of soliciting prostitution from a minor, operated freely for years due to his powerful connections.
Broad uproar of the Trump justice department’s failure to produce files grew even more intense when the Associated Press revealed that at least 16 files had disappeared from the justice department’s public website. These missing documents included an image of photos in a drawer, including a picture of Trump and his wife, Melania Trump, with Epstein and his ex-girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell.
Maxwell more recently was convicted of sex trafficking, having been found to procure teen girls for Epstein to abuse. She is fighting the conviction and the 20-year prison sentence it resulted in for her.
Trump has denied wrongdoing in relation to Epstein, and the president claimed that he had ended his friendship with Epstein years before the disgraced financier’s crimes became public knowledge. Epstein died in jail awaiting trial several weeks after his arrest in 2019 during Trump’s first presidency.
Blanche on Sunday said it was “laughable” to suggest that the justice department had removed any photos after Friday’s partial release solely to protect the president because his prior friendship with Epstein was already widely known.
“It has nothing to do with President Trump,” Blanche contended.
Later on Sunday, the justice department said it had reposted the image that had been taken down, after a review “determined there is no evidence that any Epstein victims are depicted”.
