The Justice Department has asked a federal judge not to require the release of additional unredacted records from its investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, arguing that existing redactions are permitted under federal law and are necessary to protect victims and sensitive investigative information.
The filing was submitted shortly before a court-imposed deadline requiring the department to either produce additional records or explain why it could not. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, through Justice Department attorneys, told U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan that officials had already devoted extensive resources to reviewing more than 6 million records under the Epstein Files Transparency Act and had complied with the law.
In the filing, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward said releasing many of the remaining records without redactions "would contravene the settled application" of the transparency law. He argued that the statute specifically allows the department to withhold information that could identify victims, compromise investigations or reveal other protected material, The Hill reported.
The court order stemmed from a lawsuit filed by attorney and independent journalist Katie Phang, who argues the Justice Department violated the transparency law by withholding records and applying overly broad redactions. Last week, Sullivan directed the department to release additional documents or justify why they remained concealed after concluding the government had not fully addressed the substance of Phang's legal claims, USA Today reported.
Among the records at issue are email exchanges involving Epstein discussing what court filings describe as a "torture video" and sexual activity involving young women, including minors. The lawsuit also seeks FBI interview materials connected to a woman who alleged she was abused by President Donald Trump as a minor. Trump has denied the allegation, and ABC News reported the claims remain uncorroborated.
The Justice Department said many of the disputed redactions involve victim information that remains protected under the transparency law. Woodward told the court that identifying information was removed from email correspondence because it included victims' names or personal email addresses. He also argued that some communications written by victims could appear disturbing without context and should remain protected to avoid exposing personal information.
The filing also addressed a draft 2007 indictment prepared by federal prosecutors in the Southern District of Florida. According to the Justice Department, the version released earlier this year already contained redactions in the original photocopy, and officials have been unable to locate an unredacted version. The department further argued that handwritten FBI interview notes could not safely be released because technical limitations make it difficult to verify that all personally identifiable victim information has been removed.
Rather than producing additional records immediately, the department asked Sullivan to accept its legal explanation or allow the government 60 days to consider an appeal if the court orders further disclosures. Justice Department attorneys also offered to provide additional information privately to the judge through sealed, in-camera proceedings instead of making it public.
The dispute centers on the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which Congress passed and Trump signed into law in November 2025. The measure required the Justice Department to release unclassified investigative records tied to Epstein while allowing limited exceptions, including protections for victims and sensitive law enforcement information.
The department has already published roughly 3.5 million pages of Epstein-related records while withholding another 2.5 million pages, according to USA Today. The rollout has drawn criticism from lawmakers, transparency advocates and some victims' representatives, who argue the government has withheld information beyond the exemptions permitted under the law.
Blanche has repeatedly defended the department's handling of the disclosures, maintaining that the Justice Department has complied with the transparency statute. In Thursday's filing, Woodward rejected suggestions that the government had acknowledged violating the law, writing that the department "has not knowingly violated" the statute and continues reviewing records in accordance with its requirements.
The latest filing marks another stage in the legal fight over access to Epstein records, which has continued years after the financier died in federal custody while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges in 2019. His former associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, was later convicted of sex trafficking a minor and is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence.
If Sullivan rejects the department's explanation, the Justice Department has indicated it intends to seek additional time to pursue an appeal, extending the court battle over how much of the Epstein investigation must be released to the public.
