DOJ ordered to release unredacted Epstein files or explain why it can't
Axios

DOJ ordered to release unredacted Epstein files or explain why it can't

Center Left

A federal judge on Thursday ordered the U.S. Department of Justice to release additional unredacted Jeffrey Epstein records or explain by July 2 why it can't.Why it matters: The ruling could force the DOJ to release previously withheld Epstein records or publicly explain why they remain sealed.Driving the news: U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in D.C. gave the DOJ until July 2 to comply with a preliminary injunction in media legal analyst Katie Phang's lawsuit alleging the department failed to comply with last year's Epstein Act.The department has already released 3.5 million pages under the law, but Phang argues it still improperly withheld or redacted additional material.Phang alleges in her suit against acting Attorney General Todd Blanche that the department nevertheless violated the Epstein Act for several reasons.Zoom in: In his opinion granting the preliminary injunction, Sullivan noted that Phang alleges the DOJ redacted the names of senders and recipients in "at least eight email exchanges" with Epstein regarding a "torture video" and alleged sexual activity involving young women, including minors.She accuses Blanche of "redacting the names of co-defendants in a draft indictment, the names of individuals identified as 'co-conspirators.'"Phang also alleges that Blanche withheld 36 materials mentioning President Trump, specifically, "notes from FBI interviews with a victim who has alleged that in the 1980s, when she was about 13 years old, Epstein introduced her to Trump, who in turn assaulted her."State of play: The DOJ said in a filing this month that Phang can't sue because she should have made a Freedom of Information Act request, but the journalist's lawyers argued that she had been denied FOIA requests related to the Epstein files, CBS News reported.Trump has denied wrongdoing in relation to Epstein allegations and he hasn't been charged with a crime in connection with them.Representatives of the DOJ did not immediately respond to Axios' Thursday evening request for comment.