A federal judge denied Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ro Khanna‘s (D-CA) request on Wednesday for a “special master and independent monitor” to oversee the Justice Department’s rollout of the Epstein files.
Following their successful championing of the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law, Massie and Khanna have ripped the DOJ for not complying with the law’s rollout timeline for the files. On Jan. 13, the congressmen filed for a neutral overseer to hold the DOJ accountable for the full release, in accordance with their law, of the files related to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, issued the opinion blocking Massie and Khanna’s request. Engelmayer wrote that the two lawmakers “raise legitimate concerns about whether DOJ is faithfully complying with federal law,” but said the court overseeing the criminal case against Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell does not have jurisdiction over the implementation of the newly passed law.
“This federal criminal case does not give the Court jurisdiction over—or authority to supervise—DOJ’s compliance with the EFTA, a civil records disclosure statute,” Engelmayer wrote.
He also pointed to the fact that Khanna and Massie filed the amicus curiae brief for the independent monitor before any party in the case, including the DOJ or Maxwell, motioned about the implementation of the act.
“Neither party in this case has made any motion concerning the implementation of EFTA. The Representatives’ attempt to participate here as amici curiae to raise a new issue—whether a special master or other neutral should be appointed to oversee DOJ’s compliance with the Act— is therefore not permissible,” Engelmayer wrote.
The DOJ argued a similar point in a letter to the court last week, saying the lawmakers were incorrectly using the criminal case to enforce the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
“Representatives Khanna and Massie do not have standing, their stated objectives are inconsistent with the role of an amicus as well as the role of the Court, and, in any event, there is no authority permitting the Court to grant the Representatives the relief they improperly seek,” U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Jay Clayton wrote.
When Massie and Khanna filed the neutral monitor request, the lawmakers said they “have urgent and grave concerns about DOJ’s failure to comply with the Act” and warned that “the DOJ cannot be trusted with making mandatory disclosures under the Act.”
“The conduct by the DOJ is not only a flagrant violation of the mandatory disclosure obligations under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, but as this Court has recognized in its previous rulings, the behavior by the DOJ has caused serious trauma to survivors,” Khanna and Massie wrote.
GHISLAINE MAXWELL TO BE DEPOSED BY HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE IN EPSTEIN INQUIRY
Khanna and Massie have flagged that the DOJ has not complied with the Dec. 19, 2025, deadline for the full public release of the files put into law by the act. The two lawmakers threatened Attorney General Pam Bondi with inherent contempt in the form of “a fine of up to $5,000 each day she doesn’t get these documents out,” according to Khanna.
The DOJ has maintained that it has over 2 million documents to review as it makes efforts to comply with the November law. In early January, it said it had released 12,285 of these documents so far, with hundreds of lawyers working on the rollout initiative.