House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) speak with reporters after a meeting with victims of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein at the U.S. Capitol Sept. 2, 2025. Associated Press
The House Oversight Committee on Tuesday made public a large set of files it received from the Justice Department on the sex trafficking investigations into Jeffrey Epstein and his former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, offering new material but leaving many questions unanswered.
The committee’s release marked the first time lawmakers formally posted the files for public view, though much of what they contain had already circulated in years past through court records or public disclosures. Still, the move intensified pressure in Congress, where lawmakers are grappling with how to handle the politically sensitive case and whether to force full disclosure of what has become known as the “Epstein files.”
Rumors of an Epstein “client list” have long circulated online, and during Trump’s successful bid for a second term in 2024, he suggested that if voters returned him to the White House, he would release a list of people associated with Epstein.
However, Trump reversed course in June after Elon Musk, during a public war of words with the president, alleged that Trump, a longtime Epstein cohort had not yet released the files because he was named in them.
Epstein’s 2019 death in a New York jail cell, while he was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, only fueled public mistrust and conspiracy theories surrounding his life and crimes. For many lawmakers, the stakes go beyond history or accountability. They see the continued secrecy as an affront to victims and as a failure to fully explain why Epstein was able to operate for so long.
The debate over the “Epstein files” has become not just about transparency, but about Congress’s ability to confront an ugly chapter in U.S. justice and ensure it is never repeated.
At 6 p.m., lawmakers uploaded thousands of pages and videos to a basic Google Drive, leaving it to the public to sift through the material without guidance.
The folders included hundreds of images of court documents dating back years, along with video clips that appeared to show police body camera footage from searches and interviews conducted with victims. In those interviews, the faces of victims were obscured to protect their identities. The Justice Department provided the files in response to a subpoena from the committee, but Democrats and some Republicans quickly noted that the cache was made up mostly of material already available in the public domain.
That dynamic has not slowed the demand for transparency. Pressure is mounting inside Congress for lawmakers to compel the Justice Department to release all records related to Epstein and Maxwell, with only the personal information of victims withheld. House Republican Speaker Mike Johnson is currently working to stave off that effort, trying to prevent a vote on a bill that would mandate the wholesale release of the files.
Johnson already tried once, in late July, to cool the political fight by sending lawmakers home early, but his move did little to resolve the pressure for action. Now, as the Oversight Committee takes tentative steps toward disclosure, members of Congress are again demanding more.
Even as Johnson tries to manage the process, momentum is building. Lawmakers, including Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, pushing for full disclosure launched a campaign this week to bring their legislation to the House floor. At the same time, Johnson and a bipartisan group of members held a private meeting with six survivors of abuse connected to Epstein and Maxwell.
Epstein Documents Released Tuesday
The files posted Tuesday included audio recordings that gave glimpses into past investigations. In one, an Epstein employee described to law enforcement officials how “there were a lot of girls that were very, very young” visiting the financier’s home, though he could not say definitively if they were minors. The man added that across Epstein’s visits to the property, more than a dozen girls might pass through, and that he was tasked with cleaning the massage room twice daily.
Some of the interviews carried timestamps dating back to 2005, when the Palm Beach Police Department first investigated Epstein. Many of the text documents were already publicly accessible. For instance, the probable cause affidavit and other records from that investigation included notes showing they had been released in response to a 2017 public records request, and they remain posted on the Palm Beach County State Attorney’s Office website.
Last month, the Justice Department released transcripts of interviews with Maxwell in a move the Trump administration cast as a step toward transparency after weeks of backlash over its refusal to disclose other records in the sex-trafficking case.
What People Are Saying
Johnson told reporters Tuesday, “The objective here is not just to uncover, investigate the Epstein evils, but also to ensure that this never happens again and ultimately to find out why justice has been delayed for these ladies for so very long. It is inexcusable. And it will stop now because the Congress is dialed in on this.”
Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, wrote Tuesday afternoon on X, “It’s filed. Your congressman can now sign the discharge petition to force a vote on binding legislation to release the Epstein files.”
Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, chided Republicans on the panel for releasing material that he said consisted almost entirely of already available information: “The 33,000 pages of Epstein documents James Comer has decided to ‘release’ were already mostly public information. To the American people — don’t let this fool you.”
What Happens Next
If the intent of the committee’s release was to provide new answers to a public still eager for clarity on Epstein’s conduct and connections, the execution left much to be desired. The rollout raised questions about why the Justice Department had not simply disclosed the documents directly to the public rather than funneling them through Congress.
Despite Johnson’s pledge, sharp disagreements remain over how Congress should proceed. Johnson wants the inquiry to remain with the House Oversight Committee and has drafted a resolution directing the panel to publicly release its findings when ready. Others say that approach risks keeping critical documents under wraps and delays a fuller accounting.
Newsweek