The Division of Justice on Thursday declined to show over extra info from the Epstein information as ordered by a judge, arguing the supplies embody delicate sufferer info or had been appropriately redacted as required by legislation.
Hours forward of the deadline to show over the supplies or clarify why they had been correctly withheld, Affiliate U.S. Legal professional Common Stanley Woodward requested the decide to delay the deadline by 60 days or disregard it solely by accepting the DOJ’s causes for withholding the supplies.
“Though the Authorities strongly disagrees with the Courtroom’s ruling that the [Epstein Files Transparency Act] is enforceable by non-public events via the Administrative Process Act, the Authorities welcomes this chance to resolve any confusion concerning the information at subject on this case,” Woodward wrote.
Shut up picture of a pill display screen displaying a portrait of Jeffrey Epstein beside the official U.S. Division of Justice web site web page titled Epstein Library in Washington District of Columbia United States on February 11, 2026.
Veronique Tournier/Hans Lucas/AFP through Getty Photos
Based on Woodward, some emails in query — which had their senders and recipients hid — had been redacted to guard the names of victims. For one of many emails, Woodward claimed that a few of the info was withheld as a result of “many communications written by victims, with out context, can seem disturbing on their face.”
Woodward additionally claimed that the redactions to a draft 2007 indictment from the Southern District of Florida had been current within the unique file obtained by the Division of Justice and that they’ve been unable “to find an unredacted model of this particular photocopy.”
Concerning the interview notes from a lady who made unsubstantiated assault claims about President Donald Trump, Woodward claimed that the supplies had been “deemed duplicative of the typewritten studies memorializing the interviews.”
“Their handwritten nature additional complicates the redaction course of and will increase the chance of inadvertent disclosure of sufferer [personal identifiable information] — together with due to technical limitations on the Division’s skill to run significant high quality management checks for sufferer PII throughout handwritten supplies,” he wrote.
The claims made by the girl had been uncorroborated, and Trump has denied the allegations. The DOJ has launched the interview studies from a few of these interviews, however not the underlying notes.
The U.S. Division of Justice emblem is seen on a podium earlier than a information convention, Monday, Might 4, 2026, in Washington.
Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP
Woodward additionally pushed again on the U.S. District Choose Emmet Sullivan’s conclusion that the Division of Justice successfully conceded that they violated the legislation handed by Congress to pressure the discharge of the Epstein information.
“Certainly, the Division has not knowingly violated, nor has it ever acknowledged violating, the EFTA because it continues working to adjust to statutory necessities,” he wrote.
In his order final week, Sullivan rejected the DOJ’s arguments in opposition to releasing the supplies and concluded that the Public Integrity Venture, a public curiosity legislation agency, demonstrated that impartial journalist Katie Phang was harmed by the supplies being withheld.
The DOJ started releasing 1000’s of pages of paperwork associated to Epstein late final 12 months, following the discharge of the Epstein Information Transparency Act.
Nonetheless, the division confronted criticism from some lawmakers who questioned whether or not the division violated the act by withholding some supplies and lacking the deadline to launch the information.
Appearing Legal professional Common Todd Blanche has said repeatedly that the DOJ has complied with the law.
