Attorney General Pam Bondi is staring down a constitutional confrontation not seen in nearly a century. A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers is threatening to invoke “inherent contempt,” a rarely used congressional power last exercised in 1934, to fine her for every day the Department of Justice fails to fully release the Jeffrey Epstein files.
The escalating standoff between Congress and the Trump administration over heavily redacted documents has exposed what critics call a “blatant cover-up” and what the DOJ insists is careful victim protection.
The stakes could not be higher. When President Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act in November 2025, it mandated a 30-day deadline for the DOJ to release all unclassified records related to Epstein and his convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. That deadline passed on December 19, and what followed has ignited a political firestorm that transcends traditional party lines.
What Congress Actually Got
The initial Friday release was, to put it charitably, incomplete. The DOJ published thousands of documents, but at least 550 pages were fully redacted, according to reports. One 119-page document labeled “Grand Jury-NY” came out entirely blacked out. Three consecutive documents totaling 255 pages were similarly obliterated. The promised transparency looked more like institutional opacity dressed in legal jargon.
Then things got worse. By Saturday, more than a dozen photographs that appeared Friday on the DOJ’s “Epstein Library” website had vanished. Among the removed images: one showing Trump’s photo on a desk among Epstein’s personal effects, including a $22,500 check signed by Trump framed with a caption reading “once in a blue moon.” The DOJ claimed the Southern District of New York flagged the image for review to protect victims. After public backlash, they restored it Sunday.
The Bipartisan Fury
Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, and Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, co-authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act. They are now the unlikely duo leading the charge against Trump’s own Attorney General. Their message is unified: the DOJ broke the law it was legally bound to follow.
“The quickest way, and I think most expeditious way, to get justice for these victims is to bring inherent contempt against Pam Bondi,” Massie declared on CBS’s Face the Nation. “Basically Ro Khanna and I are talking about and drafting that right now.”
Khanna has been even more pointed about what he sees as selective concealment. “What are they hiding, and who are they protecting?” he asked on Democracy Now. “Instead of holding them accountable, Pam Bondi is breaking the law. And this is the corrupt system, the Epstein class that people are sick of.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer piled on Monday, introducing legislation directing the Senate to initiate legal action against the DOJ. “Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche are shielding Donald Trump from accountability, and the Senate has a duty to act,” Schumer said.
The DOJ’s Defiant Response
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, appearing on NBC’s Meet the Press, showed no signs of backing down. When asked if he takes the contempt threats seriously, his response was blunt: “Not even a little bit. Bring it on.”
Blanche maintains the DOJ is complying with the law by releasing documents on a rolling basis. He cited the need to protect victim identities, claiming the department has received over 1,200 names of victims and family members to redact since the process began. “We’re going through a very methodical process with hundreds of lawyers looking at every single document,” he said.
On allegations the DOJ is protecting Trump, Blanche was categorical: “I have no reason to believe that the lawyers that were working on this case were talking about President Trump, because he had nothing to do with the Epstein files. He had nothing to do with the horrific crimes that Mr. Epstein committed.”
What Is Inherent Contempt?
Here is where things get constitutionally interesting. Inherent contempt is not the typical contempt of Congress that gets referred to the Justice Department for prosecution, a process that obviously fails when the subject of contempt controls the prosecutors. Instead, inherent contempt allows the House to act unilaterally. The chamber can fine or even arrest someone obstructing legislative functions through its own constitutional authority, bypassing both the Senate and the administration entirely.
The last time Congress successfully used this power was 1934, when the Senate sergeant at arms arrested William MacCracken, the first federal aviation regulator, for refusing to participate in a congressional investigation. The American Bar Association confirms this historical precedent, though the mechanics in modern practice remain untested.
Khanna and Massie are not pursuing arrest. Their resolution would impose daily fines on Bondi until full compliance. The resolution could be introduced as a privileged motion, forcing leadership to schedule a vote within two legislative days of Congress returning in January.
The Republican Fractures
The backlash extends beyond Democrats. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky told ABC that the administration’s handling will “plague them for months and months more” if they do not release everything. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, typically a reliable Trump ally, ripped the DOJ’s execution as “NOT MAGA,” blasting the heavy redactions and incomplete release.
This is the political reality the administration faces: a transparency law passed unanimously in the Senate is now being violated by Trump’s own appointees. The discharge petition that forced the Epstein Files Transparency Act to the floor attracted four Republican defectors. While Greene is set to resign her House seat in two weeks, the bipartisan coalition demanding accountability shows no signs of fragmenting.
Bondi’s Approval Rating Collapse
The political damage is already measurable. According to AtlasIntel polling conducted before the Epstein files debacle, Bondi’s approval rating has collapsed by 47 points since February 2025. She went from a net positive of +6 percentage points to a net negative of -41 in December. Sixty-seven percent of respondents now disapprove of her performance while only 26 percent approve.
Mark Shanahan, who teaches American politics at the University of Surrey, observed: “The attorney general’s role has never seemed more politicized. This was confirmed at the weekend with a partial, heavily redacted and seemingly politically-curated release of the Epstein files, with opponents such as Clinton front-loaded in the available files, and Trump himself playing a disappearing act.”
The Survivor Perspective
Lost in the political crossfire are the survivors the DOJ claims to protect. Marina Lacerda, one of Epstein’s accusers, criticized the release as a failure. “Who are we trying to protect? Are we protecting survivors or are we protecting these elite men that need to be put out there?” she asked. “I feel like again the DOJ, the justice system is failing us.”
Gloria Allred, an attorney representing multiple Epstein survivors, raised concerns that the DOJ’s redaction process was both over-inclusive and under-inclusive. Some survivor names that should have been protected were accidentally published. Meanwhile, the names of powerful men the survivors accuse remain hidden.
Khanna cited one particularly egregious example: a survivor’s name was released, but information about her abusers remained with the DOJ. This, he called, “a slap in the face.”
What Happens Next
The DOJ says more documents will be released on a rolling basis through the coming weeks. Congress returns from its holiday break in January, when Schumer’s legislation and the Khanna-Massie contempt resolution could both advance.
The question is whether enough Republicans will break ranks to pass inherent contempt against their own party’s Attorney General. Massie seems willing. Greene made her displeasure public. Rand Paul is urging full disclosure. But the House’s slim Republican majority means any defection matters.
Trump’s DOJ appears to be gambling that the political pressure will fade over the holidays. That is a risky bet. The Epstein story has proven remarkably durable across the political spectrum, uniting figures as disparate as Massie and Khanna, Greene and Schumer. The promise of transparency was central to Trump’s MAGA brand. The perception of a cover-up, however justified the DOJ believes its redactions are, cuts directly against that narrative.
As Khanna put it: “This is the Epstein class that people are sick of.” Whether that class includes anyone currently in power remains, for now, heavily redacted.