Democratic Rep. Melanie Stansbury has accused the Department of Justice of illegally partially releasing documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case, stating that this action violates the Epstein Files Transparency Act and hampers efforts for full transparency. In a CNN interview on December 22, 2025, Stansbury announced plans to explore all legal options, including potential inherent contempt of Congress charges against the DOJ, to compel the release of all files.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act, which became law in November 2025 after bipartisan support, requires the Attorney General to disclose all documents and records in the DOJ’s possession concerning Epstein by a specified deadline. However, the DOJ’s recent release has been characterized by extensive redactions and incremental disclosures, leading Stansbury and others to claim that the department is not complying with the legislative mandate.
Jeffrey Epstein, the financier who died in a New York jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, has been implicated in a network of abuse involving numerous high-profile individuals. The files in question are expected to reveal details about his associates and activities, making their complete publication critical for justice and public accountability. Survivors and advocates have long demanded transparency to address the systemic failures that allowed Epstein’s crimes to persist.
Stansbury, representing New Mexico’s 1st congressional district, argued that a partial or selective release is an explicit violation of federal law and represents a continuation of the cover-up that has obscured the truth for years. She emphasized that victims of sexual violence, some as young as 13 according to previous reports, deserve answers and that transparency is essential for their healing and for preventing future atrocities. The DOJ’s approach, she contended, is a hostile act against congressional authority and the rule of law.
As of now, the DOJ has not issued a public response to Stansbury’s allegations. The release has sparked criticism from various quarters, including other lawmakers and advocacy groups, who are calling for unredacted documents to be made available. The Epstein Files Transparency Act was passed with the intention of ensuring accountability, and any perceived obstruction could fuel political tensions and erode trust in governmental institutions.
Stansbury’s threat to invoke inherent contempt of Congress, a rarely used power that allows Congress to enforce its own mandates, could lead to a significant confrontation between the legislative and executive branches. This move underscores the deepening divide over issues of transparency and oversight in high-profile cases. If pursued, it would test the limits of congressional power and set a precedent for future disputes over document releases.
The resolution of this conflict will have far-reaching implications for how similar cases are handled in the future. A successful push for full disclosure could empower greater oversight and strengthen victim advocacy movements. Conversely, if the DOJ’s partial release is upheld, it might encourage more restrictive practices in sensitive investigations. The situation remains fluid, with all parties awaiting further developments and potential legal actions.
