What’s next now that Trump has signed a bill releasing the Epstein files : NPR

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump has signed a bill requiring the Justice Department to release the case file against convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a potentially far-reaching development in the decades-long push by survivors of Epstein's abuse for public punishment.

Both the House and Senate passed the bill this week by overwhelming margins after Trump reversed course on his months of opposition to the bill and signaled he would sign it. Now that the bill has been signed by the president, the Justice Department has a 30-day countdown to prepare what are commonly known as the Epstein files.

“This bill is an order to the President to be completely transparent, to be completely clean and to provide complete integrity to the American people,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Wednesday.

Schumer added that Democrats are prepared to push back if they believe the president is doing anything other than being “fully transparent.”

In a social media post on Wednesday when he announced he had signed the bill, Trump wrote: “Democrats have used the 'Epstein' issue, which affects them far more than the GOP, to try to distract from our AMAZING victories.”

The swift bipartisan effort in Congress this week comes in response to growing public demand for the release of Epstein's files, especially as attention focuses on his ties to world leaders including Trump, former President Bill Clinton, Andrew Mountbatten of Windsor, who has already been stripped of his royal title as Prince Andrew over the matter, and many others.

The public is waiting to see what else these files might reveal. Still, the bill would likely trigger a rare revelation of a wide-ranging federal investigation and also create the potential for unintended consequences.

What does the bill do?

The bill would force Attorney General Pam Bondi to release virtually everything the Justice Department has gathered in multiple federal investigations into Epstein and his longtime confidante and friend Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for luring teenage girls for the disgraced financier. The records total about 100,000 pages, according to the federal judge presiding over the case.

It also requires the Justice Department to release all of its internal communications about Epstein and his associates, as well as his death in a Manhattan jail cell in 2019 as he awaited charges of sexually assaulting and trafficking dozens of teenage girls.

However, the legislation exempts some parts of the case materials from liability. The bill's sponsors ensured that the Justice Department could withhold personal information about victims, child sexual abuse material and information that the administration considers classified for national defense or foreign policy.

“We will continue to follow the law with the utmost transparency while protecting victims,” Bondi said at a news conference Wednesday when asked about releasing the files.

The bill also allows the Justice Department to withhold information that could jeopardize active investigations or prosecutions. That has raised some concerns among the bill's supporters that the department would actively investigate people named in Epstein's files in an effort to shield the material from public view.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a longtime Trump supporter who has had a notable split with Trump over the bill, said Tuesday that she views the administration's compliance with the bill as a “real test.”

“Will the Department of Justice release the files or will everything remain under investigation?” she asked.

In July, the FBI said in a memo regarding the Epstein investigation that “we have not found evidence that would warrant an investigation against unindicted third parties.” But last week, Bondi complied with Trump's demands and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate Epstein's ties to the president's political opponents, including Clinton.

However, Rep. Thomas Massie, the Kentucky Republican who sponsored the bill, said “they don't have the capacity to do enough investigations to cover” all the people he believes were involved in Epstein's abuses.

“And if they do, then good,” he added.

The bill also requires the Justice Department to provide reports on what material it withheld and any corrections it made within 15 days of the files being released. It stipulates that officials cannot hide or edit anything “due to embarrassment, reputational harm or political sensitivity, including with respect to any government official, public figure or foreign dignitary.”

Who could you name?

It is widely believed that many people may be named in investigations spanning more than a decade, and some fear that simply because someone is named, that person will be considered guilty or an accomplice.

Epstein was a luminary who kept company with heads of state, powerful politicians, scientists and billionaires. The release of his emails and communications in a House Oversight Committee investigation last week has already revealed his connections to and private conversations with Trump and many other powerful figures.

However, federal prosecutors follow carefully crafted guidelines about what information they provide publicly and in court, both to protect victims and to maintain the fairness of the legal system. House Speaker Mike Johnson this week objected to the bill on those grounds, arguing it could reveal unwanted information about victims as well as others who had contact with investigators.

However, Johnson did not actually try to change the bill and voted for it in the House of Representatives.

For supporters of the bill, the main thing is public retribution for the investigation. Some of the Epstein and Maxwell trafficking survivors have been looking for ways to name people they accuse of complicity or involvement, but fear they face lawsuits from the people they accuse.

Massie said he wants the FBI to release reports of interviews with victims.

These reports typically contain unverified information, but Massey said he is determined to name the accused. He and Greene proposed reading the defendants' names on the House floor, which would shield their speech from legal repercussions. “We need names,” Massey said.