The Department of Justice quietly filed a motion Friday asking a federal judge in Manhattan to deny a request from Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) to appoint an independent monitor to oversee the release of the so-called Epstein Files.
In its filing, the DOJ argued the court lacks authority to grant the request because the lawmakers are not parties to the underlying criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell.
The Epstein Files refer to a large body of investigative records related to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein — a convicted sex offender — and the network of associates tied to him.
Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act in November 2025, and President Trump signed it into law. The statute required the DOJ to release all unclassified Epstein-related materials by Dec. 19, 2025. The release process has been slow and controversial. Earlier this month, the DOJ acknowledged that less than 1% of the files have been made public, and heavy redactions have drawn bipartisan criticism.
Khanna and Massie, co-sponsors of the law, argued the DOJ has failed to comply with both the statute and a prior court order requiring the unsealing of grand jury materials tied to the Maxwell case. They asked the court to appoint a special monitor to ensure compliance.
U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton told U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer that he does not have the authority to appoint an independent expert to oversee the release of the documents. Clayton urged the court to reject what he called an “extraordinary” request for relief, arguing the lawmakers lack standing because they are not parties to the case.
Khanna and Massie said they have “urgent and grave concerns” about the pace of the disclosures and alleged in a filing that they believe “criminal violations have taken place” in the release process.
The Justice Department said hundreds of reviewers are working through millions of documents, but did not provide a timeline for when the release will be completed.
Engelmayer will decide whether to grant or deny the DOJ’s motion.
READ NEXT: George Soros’ Origin Story – And Why It Matters Now
since the only enity that can use redactions for any reason is our goverment at all levels, it must be to hide things that are recorded and by whom. This should not be as goverment leaders and employees should be as responsible for their words and actions as anyone else. Accountability is highly inquestion. In my opinion, which is about as worthless as a bottomless bucket, is that absoultly NO redactions should be allowed except which have been authorized by a Federal Judge or out of agency reviewer. I have seen it used to allow “favored employees” practically destroy people by positing lies and deception against them so that they can then jump promotion lines.