...
By Khaleda Rahman
National Correspondent
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
A Republican congresswoman says she will file a resolution to impeach a federal judge due to “major delays” in the release of the government's files related to Jeffrey Epstein.
Florida Representative Anna Paulina Luna wrote on X on Wednesday: “I’m tired of activist judges impeding congressional investigations. Which is why I will be introducing a bill to IMPEACH Judge Paul Engelmayer for OBSTRUCTING the release of the Epstein files and failing to appoint a special counsel. The American people are sick of delayed justice and so am I.”
Newsweek reached out to Luna via email and the Department of Justice via a website contact form for comment.
Read More on News
Why It Matters
The Trump administration continues to face scrutiny over its handling of the Epstein case and delays by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in releasing its files related to investigations into Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act, which was signed into law by President Donald Trump last November, required the files be released by December 19, 2025. But the DOJ has only released about 12,000 documents so far, saying the delay is due to the large volume of files and the need to maintain the anonymity of Epstein’s victims.
Epstein died by suicide in a federal jail in New York in August 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. The case has long drawn attention due to Epstein’s connections to some of the world’s most powerful people.
...
What To Know
Luna pledged to file a resolution to impeach Engelmayer during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on Wednesday, where the panel advanced resolutions to hold former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt for refusing to sit for scheduled depositions.
During the hearing, Luna said that Engelmayer was the reason for the delay in the release of the Epstein files.
She said that Engelmayer “specifically ordered” the Southern District of New York “to do a second review and for those documents to then be certified by U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton.” It was not immediately clear which order she was referring to.
Luna later said on X that the DOJ had “completed a review of over 5 million documents, conducted by over 500 attorneys, and they are ready to be released NOW,” but Engelmayer’s order for a second review is “causing MAJOR delays.”
However, the DOJ has not announced that its review is complete or provided a timeline for releasing more documents.
In the latest update to the court dated January 15, Attorney General Pam Bondi said the DOJ has made “substantial progress” in its review of the files. She did not provide a timeline for when the review may be complete, but said the DOJ was working "to complete this review as expeditiously as possible without compromising victims' privacy."
She added in the letter to Engelmayer and another judge: “This is a time-intensive process due to the voluminous materials, the idiosyncratic nature of many of the materials, and the need to protect victim-identifying information.”
DOJ officials said in a January 5 letter that the department had released 12,285 documents so far and that "more than 2 million documents" remain in "various phases of review." The Associated Press and The New York Times have reported that the DOJ had expanded its review of Epstein-related documents to more than five million records.
During Wednesday’s hearing, Luna also pointed to Engelmayer’s denial of a request from Representatives Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, and Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, for a special master to speed the release of the files.
"If you want to get mad at someone, look no further than Judge Paul Engelmayer, who then also at the same time just denied Massie and Ro Khanna's motion to appoint a special master," she said.
Newsweek reached out to Representatives Khanna and Massie via email for comment.
In his ruling on Wednesday, Engelmayer agreed with the DOJ that he lacked the authority to supervise the department’s compliance with the new law requiring the release of the files.
He said the lawmakers, who co-authored the law, can file a lawsuit seeking a court-appointed observer to ensure compliance with the law, but said they cannot append their demand to Maxwell’s criminal case, which Engelmayer is overseeing.
Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence after being convicted for her role in luring teenage girls to be sexually abused by Epstein. She will testify before the committee on February 9, Committee Chairman James Comer said on Wednesday.
What People Are Saying
Representative Anna Paulina Luna wrote on X: “Everyone is frustrated because they want to see the Epstein files and I do too, but here are the facts: As of today, the DOJ has completed a review of over 5 million documents, conducted by over 500 attorneys, and they are ready to be released NOW.
"However, Obama appointed Judge Paul Engelmayer has ordered a SECOND review of those documents and is now requiring certification of those documents by U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton, while simultaneously blocking the appointment of a special counsel. This is causing MAJOR delays.”
She added: “I will be bringing forward a bill to IMPEACH Judge Engelmayer for obstructing the release of the Epstein files and failure to appoint special counsel! Release the files!”
Judge Engelmayer wrote in his ruling on Tuesday that the questions raised by the lawmakers and Epstein’s victims were “undeniably important and timely.”
"This decision is without prejudice to the Representatives' right to initiate a separate lawsuit. The Representatives are also, of course, at liberty to pursue oversight of DOJ via the tools available to Congress.”
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts rebuked calls for the impeachment of federal judges in a rare statement in March last year: "For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
What Happens Next
It was not immediately clear when Luna would file a resolution to impeach Engelmayer or how much support the move would have.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines