A federal judge shut down an Epstein files-related request from Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ro Khanna (D-CA), stating that the case in question is “effectively closed.”
The lawmakers called for a special master to be appointed to address the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files earlier this month, writing to U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer that they have “urgent and grave concerns about DOJ’s failure to comply with the Act as well as the Department’s violations of this Court’s order.” The letter claimed that the Department of Justice “released only a portion of responsive materials,” many of which “did not comply with the statue as written.”
The representatives reiterated their call for Engelmayer to “appoint Special Master and/or Independent Monitor for the purpose of ensuring all the documents and electronically stored information are immediately made public to be in accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.”
Engelmayer denied their request. “The only parties to the case are Maxwell and the United States, the latter represented, as is always the case, by DOJ. The Indictment against Maxwell brought charges under six federal criminal statutes,” he wrote. “Those were not brought under the [Epstein Files Transparency Act], which did not exist at the time and is not a criminal statute. And this case is now effectively closed.”
The judge further noted that the representatives “have not articulated how the criminal statutes under which Maxwell was charged would empower the Court to enforce the EFTA,” explaining that they “have not cited any case supporting that Congress’s grant to federal district courts of exclusive original jurisdiction to hear cases brought under federal criminal law.”
Despite his opposition to the request, Engelmayer acknowledged that the questions raised by both the representatives and the victims are “undeniably important and timely.”
“They raise legitimate concerns about whether DOJ is faithfully complying with federal law,” he wrote, but explained that the representatives’ “request for relief cannot be granted in this case.”
