- DOJ invoked the new Epstein Files Transparency Act to ask a Florida court to unseal 2005 grand jury transcripts within the law’s 30‑day mandate.
- Released transcripts could expose early victim testimony and potential official or elite complicity, heightening accountability and political controversy.
In a dramatic escalation of efforts to pierce the veil of secrecy surrounding one of America’s most notorious sex trafficking cases, the U.S. Department of Justice on Friday renewed its push before a federal judge in Florida to unseal grand jury transcripts from the original 2005 investigation into Jeffrey Epstein.
The filing, led by Attorney General Pam Bondi, invokes a freshly signed congressional mandate—the Epstein Files Transparency Act—that requires the release of all Epstein-related documents within 30 days, potentially overriding longstanding legal barriers to disclosure.
The move comes just four days after President Donald Trump inked the bipartisan legislation into law on November 19, marking the 38th bill of his second term and fulfilling a promise to expose what he has called a “web of corruption” tied to the late financier’s abuses.
The FrankNez Media Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.
Epstein, the convicted sex offender who died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges, long evaded full accountability through a controversial 2008 non-prosecution agreement that critics say shielded him and his powerful associates.
The Filing: A Direct Challenge to Judicial Secrecy
The DOJ’s 12-page motion, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, argues that the new law’s “clear mandate” compels the court to authorize the public release of the transcripts from Epstein’s first federal grand jury probe, which spanned 2005 and 2007.
These materials, sealed for nearly two decades under federal rules protecting grand jury proceedings, represent a fraction of the thousands of documents in the Epstein saga but could offer unprecedented insight into early allegations of underage exploitation on his Palm Beach estate.
“In light of the Act’s clear mandate, the Court should authorize the Department of Justice to release the grand jury transcripts and lift any preexisting protective orders that would otherwise prevent public disclosure,” the filing states.
Prosecutors emphasize that the request aligns with the law’s directive for “full transparency,” even as they acknowledge the transcripts’ sensitive nature, including victim testimonies that have never been aired publicly.
This isn’t the DOJ’s first attempt.
In July, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon—appointed by Trump during his first term—denied a similar bid, lamenting that her “hands are tied” because the initial request was grounded in “extensive public interest” rather than a specific judicial proceeding, as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e).
Friday’s renewal flips the script, positioning the Transparency Act as a congressional override that “requires public production of the grand jury material.”
Bondi, a fierce Trump ally and former Florida Attorney General who once tangled with Epstein’s legal team, has championed the release as a matter of justice for victims.
“The American people deserve the unvarnished truth about how Epstein operated with impunity for so long,” she said in a statement accompanying the filing, according to court documents.
Her involvement adds a layer of irony: As Florida’s top prosecutor in 2008, Bondi was criticized for not aggressively pursuing Epstein, though she has since distanced herself from that era.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act
The saga traces back to H.R. 4405, the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which sailed through Congress with near-unanimous support—a rarity in the polarized 119th session.
Introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the bill cleared the House on November 18 by a vote of 428-1 and the Senate via unanimous consent the next day.
Trump signed it into law as Public Law 119-38, wasting no time in directing the DOJ to probe Epstein’s ties to “high-profile figures,” explicitly naming Democrats like former President Bill Clinton, economist Larry Summers, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, and institutions such as J.P. Morgan Chase.
The Act’s text is straightforward yet sweeping: It orders the Attorney General to “make publicly available” all documents “relating to Jeffrey Epstein” in federal custody, including investigative files, communications, and evidence from probes dating back to 2005.
Notably, while it doesn’t explicitly reference grand jury materials, legal experts say its broad language could force courts to comply, especially given the 30-day clock ticking from November 19.
Massie, who credits himself with “forcing” the bill through amid initial resistance, celebrated on social media: “The 38th bill Trump signed into law during his 2nd Presidency is the bill I forced through Congress: Epstein Files Transparency Act, now forever known as ‘Public Law 119-38.'”
The Kentucky lawmaker, a libertarian firebrand, had lobbied for years, arguing that secrecy only protects the elite.
Bipartisan backing wasn’t always a given.
Early sponsors included Democrats like Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who co-introduced the measure in July amid mounting pressure from victims’ groups.
But the real catalyst? A February 2025 showdown during Bondi’s confirmation hearings, where she vowed to “unseal everything” if confirmed—a pledge that drew fire from Senate Democrats wary of politicizing the files.
Echoes of Epstein’s Shadow: What the Transcripts Might Reveal
Epstein’s Florida grand jury, convened amid allegations from as many as 36 underage victims, ultimately led to his sweetheart plea deal: 13 months in a county jail with work release, a slap on the wrist for what prosecutors later called a “prolific” trafficking operation.
The transcripts, if released, could detail witness accounts of Epstein’s “massage” recruitments and the involvement—or inaction—of local authorities, including then-Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter, who clashed with the U.S. Attorney’s Office over the leniency.
Victims’ advocates, long sidelined, see this as a long-overdue reckoning.
“For too many years, the system protected predators like Epstein while silencing survivors,” said Courtney Wild, a lead plaintiff in a 2019 lawsuit challenging the 2008 deal.
Wild, whose testimony helped invalidate parts of the agreement, added in an interview with the Miami Herald: “These files aren’t just paper—they’re proof of how power corrupts.
Releasing them honors the girls who were failed.”
On X, reactions poured in swiftly, blending outrage and optimism.
One user quipped, “Did I hear DURHAM’s back?!? And Epstein Grand Jury testimony to be unsealed… God willing, 2026 will be for the history books! Someone pinch me!!! IT’S HAPPENING!!!”
Others urged caution, noting the files might exonerate some while implicating others across party lines: “Every single person who raped a child or knew what was going on… need to be held accountable, Republican or Democrat.”
Critics, however, warn of a political weapon.
Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, fired back on X: “Pam Bondi might think she can hide the Epstein files from Congress, but she can’t hide them from our Committee. We WILL get the files and release them so the American people can finally know the truth.”
Garcia’s Democrats have subpoenaed Epstein-related docs before, only to hit roadblocks under the prior administration.
Broader Implications: A Reckoning for the Powerful?
The stakes extend far beyond Florida.
The Act mandates release of Epstein’s flight logs, financial records, and communications with figures from Bill Gates to former Prince Andrew—many already partially unsealed in Ghislaine Maxwell’s 2021 trial.
But the grand jury files could illuminate why federal prosecutors, under then-U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta (later Trump’s Labor Secretary), opted for kid gloves.
Trump himself has leaned in, tasking the DOJ with investigating Epstein’s Democratic links while insisting his own name in the files—mentioned in unsealed 2019 docs as a Mar-a-Lago acquaintance—clears him of wrongdoing.
“Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reid Hoffman, J.P. Morgan, Chase, and many other people and institutions,” he listed in a November 14 directive.
As the December 19 deadline approaches, all eyes are on Judge Cannon.
Her ruling could unlock a floodgate, forcing accountability or fueling fresh conspiracy theories.
For survivors like Wild, it’s simple: “No more shadows. Let the light in.”
Also Read: A DOJ Whistleblower Now Makes Revelation That Undermines the Judicial System’s Integrity
