'Grossly fails.' Lawmakers behind Epstein files' release slam DOJ

The Epstein files are out, and the lawmakers who forced their release are not satisfied.

High-profile Democrats are among the most enraged at the Justice Department's decision to release hundreds of thousands of documents on a "rolling basis"about the late accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein .

"A fraction of the whole body of evidence," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York. To demonstrate his point, he highlighted how 119 pages of one document were entirely redacted.

"Simply releasing a mountain of blacked out pages violates the spirit of transparency and the letter of the law," Schumer said in a statement. "We need answers as to why."

Schumer wasn't alone in his criticism. Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia, the ranking member of House Oversight Committee, said on CNN that the Justice Department was "defying the Congress."

The bipartisan authors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act – Reps. Ro Khanna, D-California, and Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky – also accused the Trump administration of failing to comply with their law, which nearly unanimously passed Congress in November.

"It is an incomplete release with too many redactions," Khanna said in a social media post.

"Unfortunately, today’s document release ... grossly fails to comply with both the spirit and the letter of the law," Massie added.

The law required the Justice Department by Dec. 19 to fully disclose all information in its possession related to its investigations of the well-connected financier who died by suicide in a jail cell in 2019. DOJ under the law is also required to make the files publicly searchable, but basic searches of what DOJ called the “Epstein Library” show that even basic queries – such as for "Trump" or "Clinton" – come up blank.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, in interviews on the day of the deadline and in a letter to members of Congress obtained by USA TODAY, explained that the full rollout of the files would come in batches over the next few weeks.

Blanche defended the redactions, saying a team of more than two dozen lawyers conducted a second-level review to ensure their appropriateness.

He also said the drawn-out process was due to the sheer "volume of materials to be reviewed."

"The Department's need to perform rolling productions is consistent with well-settled caselaw that statutes should be interpreted to not require the impossible," Blanche wrote.

Zachary Schermele is a congressional reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at [email protected]. Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @zachschermele.bsky.social.