The Justice Department missed a court-ordered deadline Thursday to unredact Epstein documents and told a federal judge it had already done enough, asking for 60 more days to weigh whether to appeal any further disclosure requirements.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, through his attorneys, filed a response in the final hours of the deadline set by District Judge Emmet Sullivan. The filing argued that the department had “devoted incredible time and resources” reviewing over 6 million documents under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
“As will become apparent, it would contravene the settled application of the EFTA for the Department to produce unredacted versions of many of the records at issue, and nothing requires that result,” Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward wrote in the filing.
The documents at issue included at least eight email exchanges with Epstein involving descriptions of sexual activity with young women, including minors. The court had ordered the department to either remove redactions from at least a dozen documents or show cause why it could not do so.
DOJ lawyers cited several exemptions in the Epstein Files Transparency Act, including provisions allowing redactions to protect victim identities and preserve the integrity of ongoing federal investigations. Woodward told the judge that senders and recipients in several emails were concealed because the names of victims appeared in those fields.
“One of the complicating aspects of administering the EFTA is that many communications written by victims, without context, can appear disturbing on their face,” Woodward wrote.
The department said it could not produce a set of FBI interview notes due to “technical limitations” in ensuring the removal of handwritten victim information. For a draft indictment from the Southern District of Florida, DOJ said it “has not been able to locate an unredacted version” of the document.
Rather than release the records publicly, the department offered to share additional details with Judge Sullivan in closed-door proceedings.
