Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

riversedge

(82,348 posts)
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 02:48 AM Yesterday

DOJ declines to turn over additional Epstein files, says redactions were appropriate

Source: abc news


A judge ordered DOJ to turn over more files or explain why they were withheld.

By Peter Charalambous and James Hill


July 2, 2026, 10:51 PM

The Department of Justice on Thursday declined to turn over additional information from the Epstein files as ordered by a judge, arguing the materials include sensitive victim information or were appropriately redacted as required by law.

According to Woodward, some emails in question -- which had their senders and recipients concealed -- were redacted to protect the names of victims. For one of the emails, Woodward claimed that some of the information was withheld because "many communications written by victims, without context, can appear disturbing on their face."

Woodward also claimed that.................

Hours ahead of the deadline to turn over the materials or explain why they were properly withheld, Associate U.S. Attorney General Stanley Woodward asked the judge to delay the deadline by 60 days or disregard it entirely by accepting the DOJ's reasons for withholding the materials.

"Although the Government strongly disagrees with the Court's ruling that the [Epstein Files Transparency Act] is enforceable by private parties through the Administrative Procedure Act, the Government welcomes this opportunity to resolve any confusion regarding the records at issue in this case," Woodward wrote.

Read more: https://abcnews.com/Politics/doj-declines-turn-additional-epstein-files-redactions/story?id=134430675&cid=social_twitter_abcn






DOJ declines to turn over additional Epstein files, says redactions were appropriate

abcnews.com/Politics/doj...

(@oceancalm.bsky.social) 2026-07-03T06:46:17.521Z

21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
DOJ declines to turn over additional Epstein files, says redactions were appropriate (Original Post) riversedge Yesterday OP
Congress passed a law requiring that the files be released. . love_katz Yesterday #1
To fascists with no regard for the law, it's always an option, especially if they aren't afraid of being held Karasu 18 hrs ago #19
Well, gotta say, their reluctance to come clean and show all tells you all you need to know. calimary Yesterday #2
Will a judge actually put all of them including mango Mussolini in contempt? JT45242 Yesterday #3
Why not have the judge review those documents or get a neutral party to review those documents and as long as the victim oldmanlynn Yesterday #7
They might as well put it in neon lights: TRUMP IS NAMED IN THE FILES. Vinca Yesterday #4
Start suspending counsels' bar licenses. flvegan Yesterday #5
do more than that moonshinegnomie 23 hrs ago #12
Seems like contempt of court, to me (nt) muriel_volestrangler 23 hrs ago #14
For anybody else, but, not when protecting the rapist billionaire republianmushroom 22 hrs ago #17
Over and over and over again...Some of these judges need to see the inside of a jail as well. travelingthrulife 1 hr ago #21
"the materials include sensitive victim information". Botany Yesterday #6
They will never release the Epstein files. Trump will start a nuclear war 1st. Botany Yesterday #8
Why would any judge in the US Old Crank Yesterday #9
What would be next step when the main law enforcement agency refuses to enforce laws? mdbl Yesterday #11
What is needed.... whyzayker Yesterday #10
No one is above the law. right, wink wink chuckle chuckle ha ha Ha Ha republianmushroom 23 hrs ago #13
Ruh roh... 2naSalit 23 hrs ago #15
The DOJ declines? Bayard 22 hrs ago #16
What bullshit orangecrush 20 hrs ago #18
Where are the arrest warrants? Or can we all just ignore court orders now? travelingthrulife 1 hr ago #20

love_katz

(3,310 posts)
1. Congress passed a law requiring that the files be released. .
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 03:09 AM
Yesterday

.. with the PERPETRATORS information unredacted. Declining to comply is not an option.

Karasu

(2,385 posts)
19. To fascists with no regard for the law, it's always an option, especially if they aren't afraid of being held
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 04:44 PM
18 hrs ago

accountable. Which they clearly aren't in this case.

calimary

(91,592 posts)
2. Well, gotta say, their reluctance to come clean and show all tells you all you need to know.
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 04:58 AM
Yesterday

Must be some doozies in there that we’re not supposed to see…

JT45242

(4,251 posts)
3. Will a judge actually put all of them including mango Mussolini in contempt?
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 05:26 AM
Yesterday

Of course ...who would enforce it?

But pretty big news day just before the election.

Make congress critters stand up and call mango and the rest pedophile or pedophile protectors.

The problem with relying on Q anon conspiracy nuts is that you twisted what you actually did (running a child sex trafficking ring) and tried to blame it on Hollywood and the Democrats. When you won't release the names, the conspiracy theorists will decide to go after you...for realsies this time. You know like the people who attacked pizza parlor with no basement.

You fed crazy for almost 20 years since a black man was elected. That bill is coming due. crazy sees a cover up when there isn't one. Judy imagine when they can see it in plain sight.

The votes and the lone wolf tactics will be exactly what pedophile protectors who tried to sick these crazies on decent people deserve.

oldmanlynn

(883 posts)
7. Why not have the judge review those documents or get a neutral party to review those documents and as long as the victim
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 08:55 AM
Yesterday

The judge can appoint a neutral person to review those documents to make sure just the victims names are redacted and then as soon as she got that version of it, just have her release it. To act like only Trump and DOJ and FBI are allowed to break. The law is ludicrous.

flvegan

(66,698 posts)
5. Start suspending counsels' bar licenses.
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 08:41 AM
Yesterday

Violations of an order such as this, especially based on disingenuous reasons and factually devoid arguments, should be grounds for immediate suspension and a Complaint for disbarment.

It's staggering to me just how many lawyers have been either fired or allowed to walk away from this admin with their license to practice intact.

That said, ANGH. As per the usual with the Epstein Files.

moonshinegnomie

(4,169 posts)
12. do more than that
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 11:15 AM
23 hrs ago

start locking them up too. and ordering them to pay the defendents legal expenses out of their own pocket...

Botany

(78,349 posts)
6. "the materials include sensitive victim information".
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 08:50 AM
Yesterday

Correction

“the materials include sensitive TRUMP INFORMATION”

Botany

(78,349 posts)
8. They will never release the Epstein files. Trump will start a nuclear war 1st.
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 09:04 AM
Yesterday

Merrick Garland and "The Octopus"
Drugs. Money laundering. Human trafficking. PROMIS. Iran-Contra. BCCI. Nuclear technology. Maxwell. Epstein. Kushner. Trump. Stolen elections. Russia. Israel. The story of how it’s all connected.

Trump was part of an international and multi generation criminal syndicate that included
Putin, Musk, Thiel, Epstein, U.S. Intelligence Agencies members who knew and said nothing,
Israel, HW Bush, Maxwell, Maxwell’s father, and others.


Long but worth the read everything is foot noted. No C.T. Crap.

https://thiswillhold.substack.com/p/merrick-garland-and-the-octopus

mdbl

(9,019 posts)
11. What would be next step when the main law enforcement agency refuses to enforce laws?
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 10:17 AM
Yesterday

Bayard

(30,757 posts)
16. The DOJ declines?
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 12:32 PM
22 hrs ago

Its not up to you, nitwits! Contempt of court at the least. Let the judge decide what needs to be redacted.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»DOJ declines to turn over...