A growing bipartisan dispute has emerged in Washington after US lawmakers reviewing unredacted Jeffrey Epstein files accused the justice department of improperly concealing potentially incriminating names, deepening a scandal that has continued to shadow powerful political and business figures.
The controversy follows the release of roughly three million pages of records under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which compelled disclosure while allowing limited redactions to protect victims.
Republican Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky said that after reviewing the unredacted files, he identified at least six men whose names were removed from public versions despite appearing “likely incriminated” by their inclusion.
Massie said the individuals include a US citizen, a foreign national, and someone he described as “high up in a foreign government,” though he did not disclose further details.
He warned that he could reveal the names under congressional privilege if the department does not reverse what he called excessive redactions.
Democratic lawmakers who viewed the same files echoed Massie’s concerns, arguing that the justice department failed to comply with the law’s requirements.
Representative Ro Khanna, a co-sponsor of the act, said that some documents showed every name redacted except those of Epstein and his convicted associate Ghislaine Maxwell.
“These names were inappropriately redacted,” Khanna said, adding that the files had been “scrubbed back in March by Donald Trump’s FBI.”
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche responded publicly, stating that the department had begun unredacting non-victim names and insisting that “The DOJ is committed to transparency.”
Despite those steps, Khanna and others said the corrections remain insufficient and leave unresolved questions about accountability.
The renewed scrutiny has fueled calls for consequences beyond document disclosure.
Howard Lutnick, the US commerce secretary, has faced bipartisan pressure to resign after correspondence revealed extensive past ties with Epstein, including travel arrangements.
Lutnick has denied wrongdoing, but Massie said his colleague “has a lot to answer for.”
The scandal has also reverberated abroad, with Khanna pointing to resignations in the UK government as evidence of a sharper political reckoning.
Separately, Maxwell refused to testify before a House oversight committee, invoking her right against self-incrimination.
Additional reporting has highlighted a 2006 phone call in which Donald Trump allegedly warned police that Maxwell was Epstein’s operative, contradicting later denials of knowledge.
Together, the developments have intensified demands for fuller disclosure and a clearer accounting of who was involved and who may still be shielded.