Partial Epstein document release sparks outcry from US officials

2026-02-01 - 07:35

A new batch of documents linked to the Jeffrey Epstein case has been made public, but the limited disclosure has ignited a fierce backlash in the United States. Critics, including members of Congress and billionaire Elon Musk, are accusing the Justice Department of unlawfully withholding the majority of the files, keeping key details of the sprawling sex trafficking network shrouded in secrecy. Lawmakers Decry "Violation of the Law" Leading the criticism, Democratic Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that the released material constitutes only a "minority of the files." In a post on social media platform X, she asserted that the Justice Department under Attorney General Pam Bondi is "still hiding most of them" in violation of legal requirements mandating full disclosure. Her sentiment was echoed by Democratic Representative Robert Garcia, who called the limited release "outrageous and incredibly concerning." Political Repercussions and Denials The document release has had immediate political ripple effects. Republican Representative Thomas Massie claimed that within hours of the files becoming public, a superPAC funded by major donors, including billionaire John Paulson—whose name appears in Epstein's address book—purchased $800,000 in television ads against him. Separately, tech mogul Elon Musk used the moment to forcefully deny any association with Epstein, stating he had never attended the financier's parties or visited his properties. "They are trying to deflect responsibility to me from the truly guilty," Musk said, calling for the prosecution of those who committed crimes. Background of a Persistent Scandal Jeffrey Epstein was found dead in a Manhattan jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges. His earlier 2008 conviction in Florida for procuring a minor for prostitution is widely viewed as a lenient plea deal. Allegations that he operated a vast abuse network involving powerful figures from politics, finance, and academia have made the case a perennial source of controversy and demands for transparency, which the recent partial document release has done little to satisfy.