A US federal judge has ordered the Justice Department to either release unredacted versions of several files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein or explain why the documents cannot be disclosed, marking the latest legal setback for the department over its handling of the high-profile records.
US District Judge Emmet Sullivan issued the order on Thursday in a lawsuit accusing Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche of improperly redacting key documents released under a federal law.
The Justice Department has until July 2 to comply.
Court orders release or explanation
Judge Sullivan directed the Justice Department to either:
-Release unredacted versions of several Epstein-related documents; or
-Explain why the information must remain redacted.
The ruling also requires the department to:
-Release interview notes underlying several FBI documents summarizing unverified allegations involving President Donald Trump, or explain why they cannot be disclosed.
-Produce a detailed log identifying every redaction made in the Epstein files released so far, as required under federal law.
Documents at the center of dispute
The records covered by the order include:
-Eight emails in which either the sender or recipient has been blacked out.
-A draft indictment against Epstein with the names of potential co-conspirators redacted.
-A 2019 email referencing several alleged co-conspirators whose names remain concealed.
One of the disputed emails, in which Epstein referred to a “torture video,” has drawn particular attention after lawmakers questioned why the recipient’s identity was withheld.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche later suggested that the recipient was Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, the former CEO of Dubai-based logistics company DP World.
Judge criticizes Justice Department
The order stems from a lawsuit filed in April by independent journalist and legal commentator Katie Phang, who argued the Justice Department’s extensive redactions violate the federal law requiring public release of the Epstein files.
In his 48-page opinion, Sullivan wrote that Blanche had effectively failed to defend the government’s position.
“Blanche conceded Ms. Phang’s merits arguments” by not responding substantively, Sullivan wrote.
The judge also rejected the Justice Department’s argument that Phang should instead pursue the documents through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
“FOIA does not provide an adequate remedy,” Sullivan wrote.
DOJ sought delay
Earlier this month, the Justice Department asked the court to pause any ruling in Phang’s favor for at least seven days while officials considered whether to appeal.
Sullivan denied that request on Thursday.
Justice Department defends redactions
The Justice Department has maintained that many of its redactions are necessary to protect victims’ identities, personal information and legally privileged material.
The department has also said that only about half of the roughly 6 million pages collected during the Epstein investigation would ultimately be released, arguing that many remaining documents are duplicates or unrelated to Epstein.
Millions of pages of Epstein-related records—including emails, photographs and law enforcement documents—have been released since December following demands under federal law.
However, lawmakers, journalists and Epstein survivors have continued to question why significant portions of the records remain heavily redacted or unreleased.
