The inspector general at the US Department of Justice (DoJ) is opening an investigation into whether the agency is complying with a law passed by Congress forcing the release of files related to the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein.

The announcement by the DoJ's internal watchdog comes amid criticism from lawmakers over how the files were released, and millions of other files that have not been made public.

The statement on Thursday said the watchdog would examine the "identification, collection, and production of responsive material" related to Epstein.

It added that "if circumstances warrant," the agency "will consider addressing other issues that may arise during the course of the audit".

It will also examine "guidance and processes for redacting and withholding material consistent with the requirements" in the law.

In November 2025, President Donald Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, after initially trying to sway lawmakers to vote against it.

The law requires the justice department to release all files related to Epstein and his jailed co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell within 30 days.

The agency, which has released files in intermittent batches since then, has said it has made over three million files public through its online database.

Some files were later taken offline due to privacy complaints from survivors, leaving roughly 2.

7m still publicly available, according to an analysis by CBS News, the BBC's US partner.

In January, a top justice official said that there are some six million files in the government's collection, but that some files would remain private because they contain survivors' personal information or are related to open cases.

Frustration has grown since then with some accusing the justice department of trying to protect powerful people and potential Epstein conspirators, a claim the department has denied.

Last month, the DOJ released summaries of interviews with a woman who made unsubstantiated claims of sexual assault against Trump. The agency said that the documents had been accidentally withheld.

Trump, who is mentioned thousands of times in the files including in emails and correspondence sent by Epstein himself to others, has denied any wrongdoing.

Two congressmen who played a prominent role in pushing for the Epstein law - Democrat Ro Khanna and Republican Thomas Massie - had been pushing for the inspector general's independent review.

Last month, Massie told the BBC that he was angry about the lack of prosecutions by the justice department.

"Men need to be perp-walked in handcuffs to the jail, and until we see that here in this country. we don't have a system of justice that's working," he told the BBC Newsnight programme. Earlier this month, Trump fired Pam Bondi as attorney general overseeing the justice department, partly over her handling of the Epstein files. She has been replaced by Todd Blanche, Trump's former personal lawyer.

Blanche, in an interview earlier this month after he became acting attorney general, told Fox News that the Epstein files "should not be a part of anything going forward".

Trump has been criticised by supporters for his oversight of the administration's handling of the case, with some saying he should have done more to ensure investigators uncover and pursue other criminal associates of the notorious paedophile.

Survivors of Epstein's sexual abuse also continue to call for accountability.

On Thursday, one of the most outspoken survivors, Annie Farmer, released a statement criticising a report that some lawmakers on the House Oversight Committee - which has been investigating Epstein and how he escaped justice for years - would endorse Trump granting a pardon to Maxwell in return for her co-operation with the panel's investigation.

"A pardon is profoundly insulting and a deep betrayal.

In the clearest terms possible, this move would be detrimental to survivors," she said. "We ask the Department of Justice to permanently close the door on any pardon or commutation for Maxwell and instead open the door on a criminal investigation into the enablers of Jeffrey Epstein and Maxwell's abuse

Highlighted sentences link to their corresponding claims. Click any highlighted sentence to jump to its detailed analysis.
Highlight Colors Indicate Claim Quality:
✓ Healthy Claim - No fallacies or contradictions detected
⚠️ Minor Issues - Has contradictions or minor fallacies
🚨 Serious Issues - Multiple contradictions or severe fallacies
Quality Criteria: Claims are evaluated for logical fallacies and contradictions with other news sources. Green highlights indicate healthy claims suitable for reference.
Source