A federal judge issued stern warnings to Justice Department attorneys Thursday over their failure to comply with court orders regarding the release of Jeffrey Epstein files, raising the possibility of contempt proceedings if the government continues to delay.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, who has served on the federal bench for 41 years, convened a hearing in Washington to address whether the Trump administration has adequately followed his previous directives in the case. The judge expressed particular concern about the Justice Department’s failure to provide required justifications for numerous redactions in the released documents.
When Justice Department official Andrew Block told the court he could not commit to a specific timeline for compliance, stating that the matter was beyond his control and that information would be “forthcoming,” Judge Sullivan responded with pointed skepticism.
“Christmas is forthcoming,” the judge remarked, underscoring his dissatisfaction with the vague assurances.
Sullivan characterized his orders as “straightforward” and indicated his willingness to work with government attorneys to achieve compliance. However, he made clear that his patience has limits.
“You want me to issue another order and say, ‘I really mean it this time’?” Sullivan asked at one point during the proceedings. The judge also reminded those present that he has previously held attorneys in contempt of court.
The case originated from a lawsuit filed by journalist Katie Phang against Attorney General Todd Blanche in April. The suit contends that the Justice Department has not fully complied with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, legislation passed by Congress and signed into law last year.
According to the complaint, the government failed to make certain essential redactions while inappropriately redacting other information. The lawsuit also alleges that the Justice Department improperly withheld documents containing references to President Donald Trump.
The Justice Department has maintained that Phang lacks legal standing to bring the case. Government attorneys have also characterized as “absurd” any claims that they violated Sullivan’s June order requiring additional information about specific redacted files.
Former Attorney General Pam Bondi, who oversaw the Justice Department when millions of Epstein files were released to the public, acknowledged to lawmakers after her dismissal by Trump that “redaction errors” had occurred during the document release process.
During Thursday’s hearing, Judge Sullivan referenced his experience with a previous case involving Justice Department misconduct. He cited the prosecution of Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, in which the Justice Department withheld exculpatory evidence. The department ultimately moved to reverse Stevens’ conviction in that matter.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act represents a congressional mandate for greater public disclosure regarding the government’s handling of matters related to the late financier, who died in federal custody in 2019 while facing sex trafficking charges.
The case continues to raise questions about government transparency and the proper balance between public disclosure and legitimate privacy or investigative concerns. Judge Sullivan’s forceful questioning suggests the court will not tolerate indefinite delays in compliance with its orders.
Related: Florida Woman Loses Arm in Silver River Alligator Attack
