The members of Congress who led the effort to release files on Jeffrey Epstein are eyeing penalties for the Justice Department after it failed to disclose all its documents on the late sex trafficker.
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., spearheaded passage of the overwhelmingly bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act, but they have said the records published don’t comply with the law, which required that all of them be made public on Friday.
Instead, just a small fraction of the total are out so far, with more expected in the coming weeks, and many of the documents are heavily redacted. The Justice Department maintains that it is in compliance with the law.
In an interview on CBS News’ Face the Nation on Sunday, Massie upped the ante in the dispute over obtaining all the Epstein files.
“There are several ways to get at this. Some take longer. Some are shorter. The quickest way, and I think most expeditious way, to get justice for these victims is to bring inherent contempt against Pam Bondi, and that doesn’t require going through the courts,” he said. “Basically Ro Khanna and I are talking about and drafting that right now.”
And unlike the process for impeachment and removal, the Senate’s approval wouldn’t be necessary for inherent contempt, Khanna pointed out.
He added that he and Massie are building a bipartisan coalition to “fine Pam Bondi for every day that she’s not releasing these documents.”
“Instead of holding them accountable, Pam Bondi is breaking the law,” Khanna said. “And this is the corrupt system, the Epstein class that people are sick of. So I believe we’re going to get bipartisan support in holding her accountable, and a committee of Congress should determine whether these redactions are justified or not.”
Meanwhile, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche was defiant in the face of potential legal consequences over not fully releasing the Epstein files.
In an interview Sunday with NBC’s Meet the Press with Kristen Welker, he argued that the extensive redactions were necessary to protect victims and that releasing the documents on a rolling basis instead of all at once still complied with the law.
When asked whether he takes threats of impeachment or contempt charges seriously, he replied, “Not even a little bit. Bring it on. We are doing everything we’re supposed to be doing to comply with this statute.”
Either chamber of Congress can hold someone in contempt on criminal or civil charges with a simple majority vote if that person refuses to testify, withholds information, or obstructs a congressional inquiry, according to the American Bar Association.
Any criminal charges would forwarded to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, but it’s not obligated to prosecute. In that case, the House can pursue civil enforcement in U.S. district court. Inherent contempt is a separate option when the House or Senate holds its own proceedings and cites someone for contempt.
Despite the escalation in the lawmakers’ fight with DOJ, inherent contempt stops short of the more severe threat of impeachment, which Khanna had raised on Friday.
“Impeachment is a political decision, and is there the support in the House of Representatives? I mean Massie and I aren’t going to just do something for the show of it,” he told CNN.
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
