DOJ Accused of Flouting Law in Epstein Name Dump

Lawmakers say the department skirted its legal obligation for greater transparency and muddied the waters by releasing an extensive list of names with little explanation.

Published on Feb. 23, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The Department of Justice's latest disclosure under the Epstein Files Transparency Act has sparked an outcry on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers are accusing the DOJ of failing to comply with its final obligation under the law. The disclosure included a long list of names, ranging from celebrities to politicos, with little explanation accompanying them, leading lawmakers to claim the DOJ is purposefully muddying the waters on who was involved with Epstein.

Why it matters

The Epstein Files Transparency Act was intended to provide greater transparency around the Epstein case, but the DOJ's actions have been criticized for obscuring the truth and protecting powerful individuals who may have been involved with Epstein's crimes.

The details

The DOJ's Saturday letter said the department withheld documents or made redactions it believed should be covered under attorney-client privilege and 'deliberative-process privilege,' which lawmakers say violates the law. The list of names included figures like Janis Joplin, Julian Assange, and former Vice President Dick Cheney, leading to accusations that the DOJ is lumping in unrelated individuals to confuse the public.

  • The DOJ's latest disclosure under the Epstein Files Transparency Act was released on Saturday, February 18, 2026.
  • The Epstein Files Transparency Act was signed into law by former President Donald Trump.

The players

Department of Justice (DOJ)

The federal executive department responsible for enforcing the law and administering justice in the United States.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal

A Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Washington's 7th congressional district.

Rep. Ro Khanna

A Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives from California's 17th congressional district, and one of the sponsors of the bill that required the public release of the Epstein files.

Rep. Thomas Massie

A Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Kentucky's 4th congressional district, and co-sponsor of the bill that required the public release of the Epstein files.

Rep. Dan Goldman

A Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives from New York's 10th congressional district.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“This is once again the DOJ covering up the truth.”

— Rep. Pramila Jayapal (X)

“To have Janis Joplin, who died when Epstein was 17, in the same list as Larry Nassar, who went to prison for the sexual abuse of hundreds of young women and child pornography, with no clarification of how either was mentioned in the files is absurd.”

— Rep. Ro Khanna (X)

“They're citing deliberative process privilege in order not to release some of the documents. The problem with that is the bill that Ro Khanna and I wrote says that they must release internal memos and notes and emails about their decisions on whether to prosecute or not prosecute, whether to investigate or not investigate.”

— Rep. Thomas Massie (ABC's 'This Week')

“It's to muddy the waters. It is to lump in obvious people who have nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein's crimes and his sex trafficking ring with other people who may be accomplices or may have been involved, and it's a further effort to cover up for the pedophiles and the co-conspirators.”

— Rep. Dan Goldman (MSNBC)

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow the DOJ to continue withholding documents under claims of attorney-client privilege and deliberative process privilege.

The takeaway

The DOJ's actions in releasing a long list of names with little explanation have been widely criticized as an attempt to obscure the truth and protect powerful individuals who may have been involved with Epstein's crimes. This case highlights the ongoing challenges in achieving transparency and accountability around high-profile cases of sexual abuse and exploitation.