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

[riversedge]

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

[love_katz]

1. Congress passed a law requiring that the files be released. .

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

[calimary]

2. Well, gotta say, their reluctance to come clean and show all tells you all you need to know.

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

[JT45242]

3. Will a judge actually put all of them including mango Mussolini in contempt?

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]

7. Why not have the judge review those documents or get a neutral party to review those documents and as long as the victim

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.

[Vinca]

4. They might as well put it in neon lights: TRUMP IS NAMED IN THE FILES.

[flvegan]

5. Start suspending counsels' bar licenses.

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]

12. do more than that

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

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. Seems like contempt of court, to me (nt)

[republianmushroom]

17. For anybody else, but, not when protecting the rapist billionaire

[Botany]

6. "the materials include sensitive victim information".

Correction

“the materials include sensitive TRUMP INFORMATION”

[Botany]

8. They will never release the Epstein files. Trump will start a nuclear war 1st.

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

[Old Crank]

9. Why would any judge in the US

Trust the DoJ any more?

[mdbl]

11. What would be next step when the main law enforcement agency refuses to enforce laws?

[whyzayker]

10. What is needed....

……is for someone to do a serious Daniel Ellsberg with those files.

[republianmushroom]

13. No one is above the law. right, wink wink chuckle chuckle ha ha Ha Ha

[2naSalit]

15. Ruh roh...

[Bayard]

16. The DOJ declines?

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