Epstein files: Judge warns Trump Attorney General Todd Blanche of contempt over DOJ delays

A federal judge has warned US Attorney General Todd Blanche that he could face civil contempt proceedings if the Justice Department fails to comply with court orders concerning the release and review of Jeffrey Epstein-related files.

US District Judge Emmet Sullivan, in a 20-page order on Wednesday (Sep 16) said that a contempt finding would be “premature” at this stage, but warned that it could become appropriate if Blanche does not comply with the court’s renewed directives. The case could result in the Justice Department being required to release additional Epstein records or justify and remove redactions that the court finds unlawful.

“Courts have the inherent power to enforce compliance with their lawful orders through civil contempt,” Sullivan wrote.

The warning comes in a lawsuit filed by independent journalist Katie Phang, who alleges that the DOJ has not fully complied with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which Congress passed last year.

Judge rejects parts of DOJ's justification

Sullivan said the Justice Department had provided sufficient documentation to establish that some redactions were made to protect survivors' privacy. However, he found the department's explanation inadequate for other redactions and ordered additional material to be submitted for private “in camera” review, allowing the judge to examine sensitive records outside public view.

The judge also rejected the DOJ's argument for withholding handwritten FBI interview notes on the grounds that they were “substantially similar to” typewritten reports already released.

Sullivan said the department's review protocol does not establish that documents can be withheld simply because they are substantially similar to other records. The issue had previously been raised during proceedings in the case, with the judge seeking access to the underlying notes so the court could independently assess the DOJ's claims.

Sullivan also rejected the department's explanation for not reviewing Epstein-related material written in foreign languages, which DOJ had argued was impractical for a first-level reviewer to assess.

At the same time, the judge acknowledged that some redactions covering the names and email addresses of government attorneys and law enforcement personnel were required under the department's own review rules.

DOJ pushes back

The Justice Department has maintained that its redactions comply with the law and has argued that protecting victims' identities is a key consideration.

A DOJ spokesperson told Axios: “Our filings will speak for themselves.” The department also said it had provided the judge with evidence concerning redacted victim names and argued that the lawsuit sought to unmask victims' identities.

The dispute is part of a broader legal and political fight over the release of Epstein records. Sullivan had already ordered the DOJ in June to produce additional records or explain why they could not be released.

The House is separately nearing a vote on legislation that would expand the release of remaining Epstein files. A discharge petition led by outgoing Republican Rep. Thomas Massie is close to obtaining the signatures needed to force action.