‘The Public Has a Right To Know What the Hell Is Going On’: Federal Judge Issues Epstein Files Warning to DOJ
During a hearing on Thursday, a judge asked about the redactions in the Epstein files before issuing a warning that the DOJ could be held in contempt of court unless they comply.
Photos: Getty Images JusticePoliticsTrump Administration Epstein Files
Now that Todd Blanche has been sworn in as the 88th Attorney General (derogatory) of the U.S., on Thursday he promised Justice Department staffers that he’d “lead this department with integrity” and to “uphold the rule of law fairly and impartially.” It took about a few hours for the universe to remind him how loaded that crock of shit is.
Well, less so the universe than a federal judge. During a hearing on Thursday, the DOJ was asked to explain the redactions in the Epstein files, repeatedly dodged the judge’s questions, and were then issued a warning that they could be held in contempt of court unless they comply. The hearing was scheduled in relation to journalist Katie Phang’s lawsuit against Blanche and the DOJ—in which Phang accused the failure to upload the documents in full was hurting her ability to do her job.
Contempt findings can mean jail time, fines, or court orders—all of which could permanently stain a lawyers’ professional record. “I’m not interested in doing that at all,” Senior U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said, “but I will do it to ensure that justice is administered fairly.” Please. Don’t threaten us with a good time.
NEW: Judge Sullivan spent the final 30 minutes of the Phang v Blanche Epstein files hearing telling a story of the one time he had to hold DOJ lawyers in contempt. He says he’s done it before, and he’d rather not do it again, but he will if he needs to. “It’s not a threat, it’s a promise.”
— Allison Gill (@muellershewrote.com) August 13, 2026 at 8:05 PM
Sullivan added he also had “absolutely no desire to go down that road again,” referring to when he held three DOJ prosecutors in civil contempt of court in 2009 while prosecuting former Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) for withholding information over his corruption charges. “I just don’t want anyone to be blindsided if we have to go down that road,” he said. “It’s not a threat. It’s a promise. I have a job to administer justice, and I take that very seriously.”
If only Blanche could say the same. However, it was despite red flags, crocodile promises, and the warnings of several Epstein survivors that on Saturday the Senate voted 50-49 to confirm his nomination—adding him to the roster of men–who–are–unqualified–at–their–jobs in the administration.
Prior to becoming AG, Blanche served as deputy AG (no. 2) under AG Pam Bondi—meaning, notably, that he was a part of the files’ botched release in the first place. (In this position, he also granted Ghislaine Maxwell immunity and relocated her to a low-security prison after an hourslong interview.) While the Epstein Files Transparency Act required the DOJ to release all the files it had by December, the DOJ only trickled some heavily redacted documents by its deadline before dumping more and more documents up to a month afterwards. During one of these dumps—which involved three million pages—several documents erroneously exposed the names, details, and nude images of many survivors that never wanted to be identified.
Phang’s suit is the second lawsuit over the botched release of the Epstein files, the second of which was issued earlier this month—just days before Blanche won his confirmation vote. In that case, New Mexico issued a complaint against Blanche and the DOJ for withholding documents critical for the state’s ongoing investigation into Epstein’s Zorro Ranch, which the disgraced financier and pedophile owned for 26 years.
During Thursday’s hearing, Sullivan was also given a binder of extra materials provided by the DOJ—though he pressed the DOJ on why it withheld notes from FBI interviews with alleged victims. After DOJ lawyers said they did so because the notes were “substantially similar” to typewritten ones that were already provided, Sullivan declared that wasn’t enough.
“The public has a right to know what the hell is going on in this case,” he said during the hearing. “The victims have a right to know. The public deserves to know.”