Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie have asked a federal judge to appoint a special master to oversee the Department of Justice’s release of documents related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

In a letter filed Thursday with U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York, the bipartisan pair, who co-authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act, expressed “urgent and grave concerns” about the DOJ’s failure to meet the Act’s requirements and the department’s alleged violations of court orders.

The Epstein Files Transparency Act, signed into law by President Trump on November 19, 2025, mandated that the DOJ release all unclassified records related to Epstein within 30 days. That deadline was up on December 19, 2025. However, nearly three weeks past that deadline, the DOJ has released only a fraction of the responsive materials.

According to a January 5 court filing, the department has produced approximately 12,285 documents totaling roughly 125,575 pages, while acknowledging that more than 2 million documents remain under review. Some reports suggest the actual volume may exceed 5 million pages.​​

“The DOJ claims that there is still ‘more than 2 million documents potentially responsive to the Act in various phases of review,'” Khanna and Massie wrote. “Because these figures are self-reported and internally inconsistent with prior representations, there is reasonable suspicion that the DOJ has overstated the scope of responsive materials, thereby portraying compliance as unmanageable and effectively delaying disclosure.”

The lawmakers outlined several specific ways the DOJ has failed to comply with the Act:

Missed Statutory Deadline: The department released only a portion of materials on December 19 and has continued to miss subsequent deadlines.​​

Improper Privileges: The DOJ has asserted common-law privileges that the Act explicitly does not permit, and applied extensive redactions that appear inconsistent with the Act’s prohibition on withholding records to protect “politically exposed persons”.​​

Document Removal: Independent investigators identified numerous files that were publicly released on December 19 and later removed from public access, including file EFTA00000468. While the DOJ claimed these removals were necessary to protect victims, the lawmakers suggest the issue may be more significant than acknowledged.​​

Missing Congressional Report: Section 3 of the Act requires the Attorney General to submit a report to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees within 15 days of the release deadline, identifying categories of records released and withheld. No such report has been provided.

Heavy Redactions: At least 550 pages in the initial document release were fully blacked out, drawing criticism from both Democratic and Republican lawmakers.

Khanna and Massie are requesting that Judge Engelmayer appoint a special master and/or independent monitor pursuant to the court’s inherent authority and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 53. They propose the monitor be granted authority to:​​

• Ensure all documents and electronically stored information are immediately made public in accordance with the Act
• Notify the court and prepare reports about the true nature and extent of document production
• Identify improper redactions or other improper conduct
• Compel testimony from the most knowledgeable DOJ officials about productions and representations made to the court​

“Put simply, the DOJ cannot be trusted with making mandatory disclosures under the Act,” the lawmakers wrote. “While we believe that criminal violations have taken place and must be addressed, the most urgent need now is for the DOJ to produce all the documents and electronically stored information required by the Act.”

Judge Engelmayer had previously ruled in December that the DOJ could publicly release grand jury materials from the Ghislaine Maxwell case, citing the new transparency law. He ordered safeguards to protect victim-identifying information. However, the DOJ has acknowledged that despite tens of thousands of manual redactions and quality control checks, information that victims believed should have been redacted was nonetheless posted publicly.

The Justice Department has defended its handling of the release, stating it has committed more than 400 lawyers—including 125 from the Southern District of New York—to review documents around the clock. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has said the volume of materials necessitates a rolling release and that protecting victim privacy requires painstaking efforts.​

However, the DOJ recently acknowledged discovering an additional 1 million documents not initially included in its review, which it says may be largely duplicative but still require processing.