Month: December 2025

A federal judge in New York has authorized the Justice Department to release the grand jury transcripts and other sealed evidence from the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell, ruling that Congress’ newly enacted Epstein Files Transparency Act requires the material to be made public.

U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer issued the order Tuesday, concluding in a 24-page decision that the law passed last month “unambiguously applies” to the discovery prosecutors turned over to Maxwell’s defense before her 2021 trial. The measure, signed by President Donald Trump, directs the Justice Department to disclose all Epstein-related investigative files—subject to limited exemptions—within 30 days of its passage.

The decision allows the department to seek modifications to the longstanding protective order in Maxwell’s case so it can post previously sealed records, including grand jury testimony, search warrant files, financial records, travel logs, photos, and interview reports. However, Engelmayer emphasized that victim information must remain protected and that any identifying details must be removed before release. He added specific safeguards, including a requirement that the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York “personally certify in a sworn declaration” that the department has thoroughly reviewed the files and protected victims’ identities. The additional scrutiny, he wrote, is necessary because the Justice Department, while claiming to consider victims’ privacy, has “not treated them with the solicitude they deserve” and has provided “lip service” to their concerns—especially given its earlier efforts to unseal materials without notifying the victims.

While Engelmayer authorized the release, he also stressed that the grand jury evidence in the Maxwell matter is unlikely to reveal significant new details. The panels heard only “summary testimony from two law enforcement officials,” he wrote, and nearly all of the material was already introduced at Maxwell’s 2021 trial.

Epstein, a wealthy financier accused of running a years-long sex-trafficking operation, died in a Manhattan jail in 2019 while awaiting trial. Maxwell was convicted two years later on federal charges including conspiracy and sex trafficking of a minor, and is serving a 20-year federal sentence. She told the court she would not formally oppose the Justice Department’s request. But her lawyers argued that releasing grand jury transcripts containing “untested and unproven allegations” could influence public opinion to the extent that a fair retrial—should she prevail on her forthcoming habeas petition—would be impossible. The Supreme Court rejected Maxwell’s earlier attempt to overturn her conviction, but her attorney has signaled she intends to file another petition challenging the verdict.

The Justice Department has not yet announced a timetable for releasing the files, though the law requires publication by mid-December.

Editorial credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

A bipartisan trio of former federal ethics officials and several major civil liberties groups are pressing for internal scrutiny—and public disclosure—of the Justice Department memo that authorized a series of lethal U.S. military strikes on suspected drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats have separately requested the Department’s legal analysis, writing that the killings raise significant questions about “adequate legal guidance” provided to military decision-makers.

U.S. forces have executed more than 20 such strikes since early September, killing over 80 people. President Trump has defended the campaign as lawful and necessary, saying drug shipments represent an “armed attack” on Americans. “We have legal authority. We’re allowed to do that”.

In a letter sent Tuesday, Norm Eisen, Richard Painter and Virginia Canter urged the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility to launch an “immediate investigation” into whether attorneys in the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) violated professional standards when drafting guidance that, according to a Washington Post report, concluded that “personnel taking part in military strikes on alleged drug-trafficking boats in Latin America would not be exposed to future prosecution.”

The officials argued that the opinion effectively granted “free rein for the government to murder and assassinate foreign civilians,” and questioned whether the OLC acted independently or simply ratified the administration’s position. They also challenged the Trump administration’s assertion that the U.S. is engaged in a “non-international armed conflict” with drug cartels—an argument legal scholars have repeatedly disputed.

Eisen told CBS News that experts agree the legal foundation for the strikes “does not withstand basic scrutiny.” Painter added that the OLC appears to have provided little more than a political “fig leaf.” A Justice Department spokesperson, however, said the operations were conducted “consistent with the law of armed conflict.”

Also on Tuesday, the ACLU, the New York Civil Liberties Union, and the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a federal lawsuit seeking immediate access to the OLC opinion and related documents. The complaint argues that the public has a right to understand how the government justifies what the organizations describe as illegal killings outside any recognized armed conflict. Jeffrey Stein of the ACLU said the strikes represent “cold-blooded murder of civilians,” and that those responsible should not be handed a “‘Get Out of Jail Free card.’”

In their lawsuit, the civil liberties groups argue the government’s refusal to release the legal memo prevents meaningful public oversight, noting that previous administrations have disclosed legal rationales for sensitive military operations after redacting classified details. The ACLU emphasized that under both U.S. and international law, “non-lethal measures” must be attempted before force is used and that summarily killing individuals merely suspected of drug smuggling is unlawful.

Their suit asks a federal court to order the Justice, State, and Defense Departments—now renamed the Department of War—to conduct a full search for records and release them “immediately.”

Editorial credit: DCStockPhotography / Shutterstock.com