Lawmakers threaten legal action against Bondi, DOJ over partial release of Epstein files
Rep. Thomas Massie speaks alongside Rep. Ro Khanna during a news conference on the Epstein Files Transparency Act outside the U.S. Capitol, November 18, 2025 in Washington. Heather Diehl/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Minority Leader Chuck Schumer introduced legislation on Monday that would direct the Senate to initiate legal action to hold the Justice Department accountable for failing to release the complete files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein by Friday’s deadline, which was mandated by the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
Schumer’s announcement came after Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna and Republican Rep. Thomas Massie announced on Sunday that they are pursuing “inherent contempt” charges against Attorney General Pam Bondi for not complying with the law to release the complete Epstein files.
If the effort passes, it could lead to Bondi’s arrest — though the pair is expected to introduce the resolution as “privileged” once the House returns in January, which would force a vote within two legislative days on the House floor, and it’s unclear if this effort would even be successful when it comes up for a vote.
“The law Congress passed is crystal clear: release the Epstein files in full so Americans can see the truth,” Schumer said in a statement. “Instead, the Trump Department of Justice dumped redactions and withheld the evidence — that breaks the law. Today, I am introducing a resolution to force the Senate to take legal action and compel this administration to comply.”
The DOJ faced a Friday deadline imposed by Congress and signed into law by the president to release a massive cache of records gathered during government investigations into the sex offender, who died in jail in 2019.
The Justice Department released thousands of files — ranging from investigative documents to grand jury testimony to snapshots taken by Epstein and his friends — but said it would fail to fully release all the files by the deadline. The law contains exceptions to protect victims and other circumstances, but critics say the DOJ is not following the letter and spirit of the law.
Schumer called the DOJ’s partial release on Friday a “blatant cover-up.”
“Pam Bondi and [Deputy Attorney General] Todd Blanche are shielding Donald Trump from accountability, and the Senate has a duty to act,” Schumer said.
Schumer is expected to force consideration of this bill on the Senate floor in January when the Senate returns from its holiday break. The bill would likely require unanimous consent to pass.
It is unclear if it would have that support, but the Senate unanimously passed the Epstein Transparency Act, which compelled the release of the Epstein documents.
On Sunday, Khanna and Massie, the co-authors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, announced their intent to pursue inherent contempt proceedings.
The inherent contempt power permits Congress to rely on its own constitutional authority to detain and imprison a “contemnor” — someone held in contempt — until the individual complies with congressional demands like a subpoena or a monetary fine, according to the Congressional Research Service.
The power directs the Sergeant at Arms to arrest the individual who refuses to comply with a subpoena or fine, however, once the witness complies with the subpoena, they are released.
Notably, the resolution would not require passage in the Senate to be enforced.
“The quickest way, and I think most expeditious way, to get justice for these victims is to bring inherent contempt against Pam Bondi,” Massie said on “CBS News’ Face the Nation” on Sunday.
Khanna, who also appeared on the same program on Sunday, reiterated that inherent contempt is the right path at this point.
“We only need only need the House for inherent contempt, and we’re building a bipartisan coalition, and it would fine Pam Bondi for every day that she’s not releasing these documents. I’ll tell you why, I’ve talked to the survivors, why this is such a slap in the face,” Khanna said.
On NBC News’ “Meet the Press” on Sunday, Blanche said he wasn’t taking Massie and Khanna’s threats seriously because he said he believes they are in compliance with the law. Specifically regarding threats of legal action against the department, Blanche said, “Bring it on.”
A statement released Monday morning by attorneys representing a group of Epstein survivors said omissions in the files by either redactions or unreleased pages amounted to a failure.
“We are told that there are hundreds of thousands of pages of documents still unreleased,” the statement said.
US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, Nov. 6, 2025. (Photographer: Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump said the U.S. economy is strong and insisted polls showing Americans are feeling economic pain are “fake” during an interview on Fox News that aired on Monday night.
Trump said bad news about the economy amounted to a “con job by the Democrats,” adding Democrats “feed” major news network anchors with the message the economy is bad and then “every anchor” does “exactly what they say.”
“I’ll never forget, they used a word like ‘manufactured,'” Trump said in the interview. “You remember the word ‘manufacture’? It’s a ‘manufactured’ economy. Nobody uses that word. Every anchor broke in ‘manufactured.’ They do exactly what they say. It’s such a rigged system.”
The U.S. economy grew at an annualized rate of 3.8% in the second quarter in the government’s final estimate, besting a 3.3% rate issued in its second estimate and far exceeding a 3% initial estimate. But consumer prices rose 3% in September compared to a year ago, with inflation at its highest level since January, the most-recent government data showed. The inflation reading came in lower than economists’ expectations.
Trump defended his handling of the economy, saying that costs are “way down” across the board.
“So are you ready? Costs are way down,” Trump said. “Gasoline is going to be hitting $2 pretty soon, or around $2. Gasoline is at $2.70 now and it was at $4.50 under Biden, under sleepy Joe. When gasoline comes down, when energy comes down — and everybody agrees energy is down — we drill, you know, drill, baby drill. We’re going like wild.”
The average consumer price for a gallon of gas in the U.S. was $3.072 on Tuesday, according to AAA, which said the average price was $3.083 a gallon a year ago.
Trump was also pressed about a rollout by his administration for a 50-year mortgage option, something that faced criticism on social media as critics pointed out that the extended payoff timeline would mean Americans would pay more in interest than they would through the life of a shorter loan.
Laura Ingraham, the Fox News host, suggested to Trump that longer loans could be construed as a “giveaway to the banks” and would simply be “prolonging the time it would take for Americans to own a home outright.”
Trump pushed back on Ingraham, saying that “all it means is you pay less per month.”
“You pay it over a longer period of time. It’s not like a big factor. It might help a little bit,” Trump said. “But even with interest rates up, the economy is the strongest it’s ever been. You know, you asked me, just to go back to the beginning of your question, you talked about prices. We’re down on energy. We’re down on interest rates.”
“Well, first of all, the East Wing was a beautiful, little, tiny structure that was built many years ago, that was renovated and expanded and disbanded and columns ripped out, and it had nothing to do with the original building,” he said. “It was a poor, sad sight, and I could have built the ballroom around it, but it would not have been — we’re building one of the greatest ballrooms in the world, by the way.”
“But the East Wing, that building was renovated 20 times, including adding a floor to the top, which was terrible, Trump continued. “It was at a common brick little, tiny windows. It looked like hell. It had nothing to do with the original building, and I didn’t want to sacrifice a great ballroom for an okay ballroom by leaving it right smack in the middle.
Jason C. Andrew/Politico/Bloomberg via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — President Donald Trump and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene escalated their feud over the weekend after the Georgia Republican slammed the president and the administration over a number of topics, including the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.
Trump went so far as to withdraw his support for Greene and said he would support a primary challenger.
“Lightweight Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Brown (Green grass turns Brown when it begins to ROT!), betrayed the entire Republican Party when she turned Left,” Trump said in a social media post Saturday morning as part of an online back and forth with Greene.
Greene said Saturday in an X post that she had received death threats.
“As a Republican, who overwhelmingly votes for President Trump‘s bills and agenda, his aggression against me which also fuels the venomous nature of his radical internet trolls (many of whom are paid), this is completely shocking to everyone,” she said.
The conflict began this week after Greene questioned in an NBC News interview if Trump was focused on domestic affairs.
“No one cares about the foreign countries. No one cares about the never-ending amount of foreign leaders coming to the White House every single week,” she said in the interview.
On Friday, Trump responded to her words, telling reporters aboard Air Force One, “she is a very different figure,” and that he was no longer “a fan.”
“Something happened to her over the last period of a month or two where she changed. I think politically, I think that her constituents aren’t going to be happy,” he said. “But when she says, ‘Don’t go overseas.’ If I didn’t go overseas, we might be in a war right now with China.”
Trump added he would consider backing a primary challenger and in a social media post later in the night withdrew his endorsement of the congresswoman.
He wrote, “all I see ‘Wacky’ Marjorie do is COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN.”
“I understand that wonderful, Conservative people are thinking about primarying Marjorie in her District of Georgia, that they too are fed up with her and her antics and, if the right person runs, they will have my Complete and Unyielding Support,” the president added.
Greene pushed back against Trump Friday night in an X post, contending that the president was upset with her after she texted him about the ongoing Epstein investigation.
“And of course he’s coming after me hard to make an example to scare all the other Republicans before next weeks vote to release the Epstein files,” she said. “It’s astonishing really how hard he’s fighting to stop the Epstein files from coming out that he actually goes to this level.”
“I never thought that fighting to release the Epstein files, defending women who were victims of rape, and fighting to expose the web of rich powerful elites would have caused this, but here we are,” Greene said in an X post Saturday morning “And it truly speaks for itself.”
The president, who spent Saturday morning golfing in Florida, slammed Greene in a social media post arguing she, “became the RINO that we all know she always was. Just another Fake politician.”
(NEW YORK) — President Donald Trump’s redistricting push to preserve a Republican majority in Congress and allied voting rights cases in Texas and Louisiana could wipe out nearly a third of the 62-member Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) if all the electoral and judicial dominoes fall his way.
Missouri Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, who has served 11 terms in the House, called the efforts as “blind, and sometimes even mean-spirited, political decisions that those who perpetuate it could easily deny it.”
Cleaver’s district is one of those in the crosshairs of Trump’s march to enlist statehouses and the courts to increase Republican seats in Congress at the expense of Democrats — many longstanding, dozens of them Black and Brown.
“There are probably some good and decent people who, but for their cult-like political attitudes, would not like something like this to happen,” Cleaver added as he tried to make sense of how he and his district are threatened by what he says is a double-barreled salvo aimed at the Voting Rights Act and state legislatures.
Cleaver’s senior colleague from South Carolina was more blunt.
“These are people who are trying to rig the system, making it very clear that there are certain people who will not be represented in Congress,” said Democratic Rep. James E. Clyburn, who has worn multiple House leadership titles along with being a Presidential Medal of Freedom holder. He has represented the Palmetto State since 1993 and, like Cleaver, once led the CBC — a staple of Capitol Hill politics since 1971.
On Monday, a coalition of voters of color and civil rights advocates will ask the Supreme Court to maintain a lower court’s ruling that Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s redrawn map is an illegal racial gerrymander.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito temporarily paused the lower court’s order last week.
The Texas maps were set in motion by Abbott at the behest of Trump, who has openly called on Republican-controlled statehouses and governors to pass maps so that his party gains more seats and maintains control of Congress.
“A very simple redrawing; we pick up five seats. And we have a couple of other states where we’ll pick up seats also,” Trump said of Texas and other efforts in July.
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act The effect of the new maps in Texas, Louisiana and elsewhere puts at risk so-called “majority-minority” seats made possible by Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prevents any voting procedure or practice which results in a denial of the right to vote using race, color, or even language minority status.
It is also the main legal tool used to challenge election laws, like district maps, which may have a discriminatory result, even if that wasn’t the intent.
Such a challenge under Section 2 may lead to the creation of a majority-minority district where a racial minority group makes up the majority of the voting-age population. The goal in the case of such a district is to give the minority, racial or language group a realistic chance to elect the representative of their choice.
Many of those majority-minority districts are held by African American and Latina/Latino members. Some political and legal analysts say up to 19 members of the CBC stand to be wiped out.
Cleaver, whose Kansas City-area district would be cut in two in a redrawn Missouri map, told ABC News that the effort is part of an overall step backward when it comes to racial representation.
“We are just tearing apart a district in order to satisfy someone’s desire for reelection,” Cleaver told ABC News in September.
Clyburn said “It’s pretty clear what it’s about: What they’re trying to do now is render Section 2 ineffective.”
He added, “You got to hope that the Supreme Court will not take it up … The Supreme Court can stay out of it, and then what the law court has already done, it will stand. And there are a lot of people who think that may be the case.
“I hope the Supreme Court collectively will come to understand that they have unleashed severe threats to those constitutional principles that have kept this country together for all of these years.”
Louisiana’s congressional map was redrawn in 2022 because it violated the Voting Rights Act Section 2 by discriminating against African American voters.
The Pelican State went back to the drawing board to create a new map to follow the law. The majority-minority districts are now in front of the Supreme Court as to whether they violate the Constitution.
Janai Nelson, president and director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, called that challenge “specious and wrong.”
Republicans contend their redrawn maps are not about race but are driven by a desire for partisan advantage — something the Supreme Court has ruled is constitutional.
Abbott defended Texas’ redistricting effort, saying race had nothing to do with it and calling a lower court decision “clearly erroneous.”
“The Legislature redrew our congressional maps to better reflect Texans’ conservative voting preferences — and for no other reason,” Abbott said in a statement. “Any claim that these maps are discriminatory is absurd and unsupported by the testimony offered during ten days of hearings. This ruling is clearly erroneous and undermines the authority the U.S. Constitution assigns to the Texas Legislature by imposing a different map by judicial edict.”
Nelson said “Despite the Supreme Court’s permissiveness around partisan gerrymandering, this certainly is unconstitutional and is a case that they take up. I think the three-judge panel was quite clear on what the violations were. It was clear from the very beginning that the intention is to dilute the voting power of Black and Latino communities in Texas.”
Protecting vulnerable members Cleaver acknowledged the reality of fighting it out in state legislatures.
“We’re minorities politically. So, it’s not like we can submit a piece of legislation to make it right,” Cleaver told ABC News. “We’re going to lose on all of the votes.”
He said Rep. Gregory Meeks, chair of the CBC’s political action committee CBC-PAC, has identified vulnerable members who the group aims to put on a “protection plan.” Some of those members include Louisiana Reps. Troy Carter and Cleo Fields, Alabama Reps. Terri Sewell and Shomari Figures, Georgia Rep. Lucy McBath, Texas Reps. Al Green, Marc Veasey and Jasmine Crockett, Mississippi’s Bennie Thompson, Florida Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick and Clyburn.
The CBC-PAC will raise money for candidates who are “fighting for survival in these places where they were redistricted and left to win in a district that’s not normally responsive to us,” Cleaver said.
Members of other ethnic groups who are vulnerable include Texas Reps. Vicente Gonzalez, Joaquin Castro and Julie Johnson.
Cleaver said campaigning in the proposed new districts amounts to surrender.
“If you start saying, ‘I want to go out and start campaigning in the proposed district,’ you are actually playing right into the hands of the people who are trying to eliminate you. If we think we’re right, we ought to act like we are right,” he said.
Clyburn, a big ground-game supporter, backs efforts to pass referendums such as one building signature support in Missouri to block the new congressional map recently passed and signed by Gov. Mike Kehoe. The new map takes effect in early December, or 90 days after the end of the state’s legislative session, unless opponents collect enough signatures to put the new map to a vote.
However, the effort by referendum advocacy group People over Politicians, which claims it has the necessary signatures to put the new map to a vote is being challenged in court by secretary of state and the state General Assembly, which contends on constitutional grounds that the legislature’s authority over redistricting cannot be overturned by referendum.
People over Politicians says the Republican-led government’s argument is an attempt to justify a “power grab. A federal judge he’ll the matter by Dec. 9, two days before the deadline for gathering signatures for a referendum.
Until then, Cleaver is comforted by those fighting on his behalf which includes an unusual and large coalition of multi-racial clergy, grassroots activists and business leaders who normally are silent. “So, you know we’re not, those of us who are in office. We’re not alone. We’re not alone.”
Effect of striking down majority-minority districts So, what, at the end of the day, do the Louisiana and Texas Voting Rights Act-related cases mean for the law itself if majority-minority districts are struck down by the Supreme Court? Nelson explains both the practical and constitutional stakes.
Nelson said there are up to 19 districts that have been protected by or drawn in response to the Voting Rights Act. She explained the practical and constitutional stakes if majority-minority districts are struck down by the Supreme Court:
“And we expect that, you know, states that are opposed to, you know, shared power among people of all races and backgrounds will leap at the opportunity to redraw maps in a way that shuts out a significant portion of our electorate from ever being able to elect candidates of their choice.”
Nelson said such a move by the court “would be a colossal undercutting of power that would then translate into even more failed policies for some of the most vulnerable communities in our country. So the impact would be absolutely devastating,” she said. “This is not just, you know, political warfare or partisan competition. This is making a mockery of a representative democracy when you don’t have fair representation.”
Clyburn for his part would rather mobilize than wait for parties out of his control to act.
“We need to be involved, to turn out the vote and do what we can to make sure that people get to the polls, and hopefully do what is necessary to stop the redistricting at the polling places. That’s what we can do,” he said. “To sit around wringing our hands about what the court may or may not do is a waste of time, energy, and, I think, emotions.”
