What Epstein files could be released by the Justice Dept. if Congress requires it?

The House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved — in rare bipartisan fashion — a bill that would require the Justice Department to release a trove of documents tied to investigations of sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. 

If the Senate also passes the measure, President Trump’s signature would clear the way for the release of a new set of documents, including material not previously disclosed among the tens of thousands of pages released in batches from congressional investigators. Those disclosures have brought new focus on the former financier’s global social circle of wealthy, powerful men.

What Epstein files would be released, according to the bill?

The bill, in its current form, would require the attorney general to make public all unclassified records, documents, communications and investigative materials in possession of the Justice Department, the FBI and U.S. attorneys’ offices within 30 days of becoming law. 

Combined, the documents would stem from a pair of federal investigations, in Florida and New York, spanning more than a decade. 

The two cases spawned widespread accusations of conspiratorial coverups, as it became clear that Epstein’s jetsetting revolved around wining, dining and business deals with a wide cross section of world leaders and celebrities. Recent CBS News investigations have raised questions about the circumstances of Epstein’s 2019 death in custody, and shown that Epstein continued to court the rich and famous right up until his 2019 arrest, even as sex trafficking accusations intensified following a 2008 “sweetheart deal” with prosecutors in Florida.

The documents could include bank records, correspondence, witness interviews and communications or other files retrieved from Epsteins’ electronic devices.

New releases could reveal “troublingly close relationships” between Epstein and notable people, law professor says, though not necessarily more criminal conduct

Columbia Law School professor and former federal prosecutor Daniel Richman said a recent release of files might give a hint of what to expect. Last week, the House Oversight Committee published thousands of documents showing emails and text messages sent to and from Epstein — with Democrats on the committee highlighting emails in which Epstein suggested Mr. Trump “knew about the girls.”

“From a public interest perspective, the preview from House Dems last week suggests the files may reveal troublingly close relationships between Epstein and various notables,” Richman said, but cautioned that he believes federal prosecutors in New York would have pursued any substantial leads with “zeal.” 

“I would not be quick to assume any revelations when it comes to chargeable criminal conduct,” Richman said.

Former Epstein attorney David Schoen told CBS News he’s concerned that the slow drip of file releases could harm the reputations of people who might have socialized or did business with Epstein, without involvement in his crimes. He pointed to an announcement Monday night by former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers that he’s “stepping back from public commitments” as scrutiny over his relationship with Epstein builds.

Summers said he was “deeply ashamed of my actions and recognize the pain they have caused.” The correspondence that was published suggests Summers sought advice on women from Epstein: “I said what are you up to,” Summers wrote in part of one message, describing a conversation with the woman. “She said ‘I’m busy.’ I said awfully coy u are.”

Epstein’s reply read, in part: “shes smart. making you pay for past errors.” There is no evidence of illegal conduct on Summers’ part.

Schoen said, “My fear is that people’s reputations will be tarnished now because their names appear even though they did nothing wrong.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson has said he expects the Senate will amend the legislation to address what he called “serious deficiencies” related to survivors’ privacy and the possibility of unintended disclosure of sensitive information. 

The Justice Department and FBI sought to address some of those concerns in an unsigned July memo, describing a review of the files, which it said contain “images and videos of victims who are either minors or appear to be minors, and over ten thousand downloaded videos and images of illegal child sex abuse material and other pornography.” 

The agencies wrote in their memo that “while we have labored to provide the public with maximum information regarding Epstein….no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.”

Richman said he didn’t put much stock in the Justice Department’s decisionmaking related to withholding documents related to Epstein.

“Such withholding might well be normal, but here, I worry that it will be used as a cover for a selectivity that helps Trump and his friends and hurts those he considers his enemies,” said Richman. The Columbia Law School professor is a longtime friend of former FBI Director James Comey, a frequent target of Mr. Trump’s ire who was indicted in September on two federal counts related to past testimony to Congress.

FBI review revealed no Epstein client list

While Attorney General Pam Bondi implied during a Fox News interview in February that an Epstein “client list” was sitting on her desk, in the July memo her agency and the FBI claimed, “this systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list.'” 

“We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties,” the July memo said.

Actress Alicia Arden, who accused Epstein of sexual battery during a 1997 incident, said during a Monday press conference with lawyer Gloria Allred that it’s a bipartisan issue, and asked, 

“Why would there be a single ‘No’ vote?”

“Vote to release these files so we can finally see who else helped Jeffrey Epstein,” Arden said.

New Epstein investigation could affect any release of files

A recently announced investigation could complicate the matter.

Bondi said on Friday that she had asked U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton to open an investigation hours after Mr. Trump demanded a probe into several prominent Democrats and financial institutions.

It is unclear how that new investigation might impact efforts to release files related to Epstein’s closed cases. Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky said Monday he worries that the new investigation could be used to block the release of some files. The Justice Department and Bondi have not commented further on Clayton’s investigation.

“I’m concerned that now he’s opening a flurry of investigations, and I believe they may be trying to use those investigations as a predicate for not releasing the files. That’s my concern,” Massie, who led the effort to get the bill to the House floor, told reporters. “I’m afraid they’re going to try to use a provision of the law that allows you not to release these materials if they’re subject of an ongoing investigation.”

During Arden’s press conference Monday, attorney Gloria Allred echoed Massie’s concern.

“So, now we’re just involved in this political bloodbath trying to get answers. All I can say is when the fog of political war clears, I certainly hope that the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein will have more answers and information than they have now,” Allred said.