DOJ’s 500-strong Epstein task force claims “substantial progress”—yet zero documents emerge a month after transparency deadline
WASHINGTON — On January 17, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice issued another carefully worded update: more than 500 staff members are making “substantial progress” reviewing millions of pages from the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. The statement offered no release date, no sample pages, and no explanation for why—nearly one month after the statutory deadline imposed by the Epstein Files Transparency Act—absolutely nothing has reached the public.
The 2025 Act required phased disclosure of all non-grand-jury material by December 19, 2025, with victim identities permanently redacted. Instead, 2026 has begun in silence. Officials cite the sheer scale: 12–15 million pages across hard drives, safes, and server backups, plus thousands of photographs and videos. Redaction teams reportedly work in windowless SCIFs, using custom software and manual review to ensure no survivor can be identified. “This is the most victim-sensitive declassification in history,” a senior DOJ official told Reuters on background.
Yet the absence of even a symbolic first tranche has fueled accusations of deliberate obstruction. Transparency watchdogs point to historical parallels—the JFK assassination files, released in batches despite similar sensitivity concerns, or the 9/11 Commission documents, declassified under public pressure. In those cases, partial releases built momentum. Here, the vault remains sealed.
Sources inside the review process describe internal battles: FBI agents pushing for broader redactions to protect ongoing investigations, civil attorneys demanding narrower ones to honor the Act’s spirit, and political appointees wary of headlines. One former prosecutor familiar with the effort told The Washington Post that certain high-profile names—politicians, celebrities, business titans—trigger automatic escalation to the Attorney General’s office, creating logjams.
Public fury is mounting. Petitions on Change.org and AVAAZ have surpassed 800,000 signatures demanding immediate partial release. Legal scholars warn that prolonged opacity risks eroding faith in institutions already battered by the Epstein saga. “When transparency is promised and then indefinitely postponed,” says constitutional lawyer Laurence Tribe, “people naturally assume the worst—that the system is protecting its own.”
The DOJ insists a “significant” first batch is “imminent.” But with each passing day, “imminent” sounds less like a timeline and more like a shield. Until the documents finally see daylight, the question is no longer whether progress is being made behind closed doors—it is who that progress ultimately serves.
Leave a Reply