In New York, the lead federal prosecutor in Manhattan has contended that a judge does not possess the authority to appoint a neutral third-party monitor to supervise the public dissemination of documents related to the high-profile sex trafficking investigations of financier Jeffrey Epstein and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell. This position comes in response to a recent petition from two U.S. Representatives seeking such an appointment.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer was addressed in a letter signed by U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton, who argued that the court must reject the demand made by the congressional sponsors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Representatives Ro Khanna of California and Thomas Massie of Kentucky jointly expressed serious concerns regarding the slow pace and limited scope of document releases, which began the previous month amidst the ongoing case scrutiny. They have alleged, in legal filings, that the process has witnessed "criminal violations".
Despite these allegations, Clayton asserted that Khanna and Massie do not have the requisite standing in the matter, which prohibits them from seeking the "extraordinary" remedy of appointing a special master or independent monitor. He emphasized that Judge Engelmayer, presiding over Maxwell’s criminal case, "lacks the authority" to grant such a measure, particularly since the Representatives are not parties to the underlying criminal proceedings that resulted in Maxwell's conviction in December 2021. Maxwell received a 20-year prison sentence for her role in recruiting victims for Epstein’s abuse and facilitating the trafficking operation.
Representative Khanna criticized Clayton's characterization of their request, stating the Department of Justice had misunderstood their motives. He insisted that the request aimed to alert the court to what they view as substantial misconduct by the Justice Department itself — misconduct which victims have reportedly requested be addressed by the court. "We are informing the Court of serious misconduct by the Department of Justice that requires a remedy, one we believe this Court has the authority to provide, and which victims themselves have requested," Khanna said in a formal statement.
He further maintained that their objective is to ensure that the Justice Department adheres to its commitments both to the court and legal obligations specified by relevant legislation. The background of the case includes Epstein’s death in a New York federal jail in August 2019, while he awaited trial on sex trafficking charges. His death was officially ruled a suicide.
The Justice Department has indicated to the court that it plans to provide another update in the near future regarding progress in the document turnover from the investigation files on Epstein and Maxwell. Clayton noted in his letter that the pace of the release has been hindered by the necessity of redacting sensitive information to protect the privacy of abuse victims.
However, in their correspondence, Representatives Khanna and Massie criticized the Department’s release rate, pointing out that only approximately 12,000 documents have been made public out of over 2 million under review. They described this as a "flagrant violation" of statutory requirements to disclose information and highlighted the severe distress caused to survivors due to the protracted delay.
The legislators explicitly expressed that the Department of Justice should not be solely entrusted with mandatory disclosures stipulated by the act. Consequently, they requested the court to appoint an independent monitor responsible for ensuring immediate public availability of all documents and electronically stored information related to the case. This monitor should also have the authority to compile reports elucidating the completeness and accuracy of the disclosures and to investigate any improper redactions or misconduct during document production.