A judge finally put DOJ 'on notice' for Epstein files stalling | Opinion

I'm no lawyer.

But I've spent enough time in courtrooms to know that when a federal judge wraps up a hearing with a cautionary conversation about the time he held Department of Justice attorneys in contempt of court, things are going from bad to worse for the DOJ regarding the Epstein files.

That was the amazingly amiable advice offered at the close of an Aug. 13 hearing by Senior U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan to DOJ lawyers who showed up with few of the documents he had ordered produced – and also with no answers on when or if they will do as he ordered.

Sullivan told Andrew Block, a DOJ attorney representing Attorney General Todd Blanche, about his 2009 contempt finding in the District of Columbia's court, later affirmed on appeal. Sullivan made clear in the hearing that nobody at the DOJ is in trouble – yet – but that he was putting the government lawyers on "fair notice."

"I'm not interested in doing that at all," Sullivan said from the bench about a contempt finding, which has been suggested by attorneys for independent journalist Katie Phang during her lawsuit against Blanche. "But I will do it to make sure justice is administered fairly. That's not a threat. It's a promise."

Sullivan issued that warning during a hearing I listened to on a court phone line, just after issuing a new order, giving Phang's lawyers 10 days to write up language for how they want him to proceed next in seeking the missing Epstein files.

Block spent most of the Aug. 13 hearing stumbling through answers for why the DOJ had not produced documents as Sullivan ordered, including handwritten notes from FBI agents who used them to later type reports contained in the Epstein files.

DOJ lawyers still have no answers on Epstein files – and lack of progress

Jeffery Epstein, a convicted sex offender and former pal of Trump's, died in federal prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

Sullivan told Block he wanted to be sure the original notes "are consistent" with the reports they later helped produce.

Phang's lawyers have consistently pointed to efforts by Blanche and the DOJ to stall the case. "They just don't want to produce those documents," attorney Emily Gilman told Sullivan during the hearing.

The DOJ also had no answer for why it had not published to the Federal Register a log of redactions made before publicly releasing Epstein files, as required by federal law. Sullivan suggested that the legal requirement has been overdue since December, prompting Block to say the information will be "forthcoming."

"Christmas is forthcoming," Sullivan shot back. "I'm willing to work with you. But the public demands a timeframe, not just me."

Sullivan repeatedly noted that his Aug. 6 order scheduling the hearing made clear what information he wanted produced and what topics the DOJ lawyers should have been prepared to discuss. The judge called that order "straightforward" and "unambiguous."

"The public has a right to know what the hell is going on in this case," Sullivan said. "The victims have a right to know."

A former prosecutor is working to force the DOJ's hand

Phang, a former prosecutor and cable news anchor who now works as an independent journalist with a YouTube channel, sued Blanche and the DOJ in April, asking a federal court to appoint a special master to review and release more Epstein files.

Phang has repeatedly accused Blanche of stalling and obfuscating, using the legal system to stymie her pursuit of the files. Blanche kept that up on Aug. 5, asking the judge to delay any future filing deadlines in the case.

Here is how Phang's lawyers responded to that on Aug. 11:

Blanche's request, they wrote, "lacks any legal basis, and it also has no basis in reality." They accused the attorney general of missing deadlines by more than a month and failing to comply with court orders. "The attorney general is obviously trying to delay this case, and this court should not condone his tactics."

The timeline lends credence to the argument that Blanche is delaying on Trump's behalf.

Trump promised, while campaigning for a second term in 2024, to release the Epstein files. But since taking office more than a year and a half ago, Trump has been on a mission to delay and deny transparency.

Trump administration is clearly stalling

The U.S. House and Senate in November passed the bipartisan law requiring the release of the Epstein files. Despite Trump's histrionic lobbying against that legislation, just one Republican in the House opposed it.

Trump shows an interesting double-talk as he tries to evade transparency for the Epstein files.

First, he keeps claiming to have been "totally exonerated" by the documents that have been released. But Trump's name is all over the files and those documents, which include allegations made against him, can't reasonably be considered exoneration.

And then, if Trump is so confident his name is in the clear, why is Blanche, his new attorney general and former criminal defense lawyer, spending so much time stalling a judge?

Contempt of court is now a very real possibility because the DOJ obviously does not want to produce the missing Epstein files, to protect Trump.

Follow USA TODAY columnist Chris Brennan on Bluesky, @bychrisbrennan.bsky.social, and on X, @ByChrisBrennan. Sign up for his weekly newsletter, Translating Politics, here.