Kash Patel defended the Trump administration’s handling of Jeffrey Epstein document releases, claiming officials followed the law despite missing a court-ordered deadline by over two months and bungling the public release.

Administration Misses December Deadline

The Department of Justice was required to release all documents related to convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell by December 19, 2024, under the Epstein Files Transparency Act signed in November. The deadline passed without compliance, with the DOJ finally releasing over 3.5 million pages, videos, and images on January 30, 2025. Patel told Fox News that three previous administrations had opportunities to release the materials, but his team produced everything legally possible.

The release faced immediate criticism after the DOJ accidentally published unredacted explicit photographs on its public website, accessible through basic age verification. Some images appeared to show young women and potentially teenagers with Epstein. The department acknowledged the error in a Monday letter to federal judges, stating thousands of documents were removed due to technical and human errors that inadvertently included victim-identifying information.

Millions of Files Still Missing

Despite the massive document dump, nearly three million files remain unreleased. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced that the release marked the end of the department’s comprehensive review process, emphasizing compliance with transparency requirements. Patel cited multiple court cases, protective orders, and legal constraints as reasons for the delayed and incomplete release, stating officials prioritized protecting victims’ rights while following applicable laws.

What This Means

The botched release highlights ongoing challenges in balancing transparency demands with legal protections for victims and ongoing investigations. While the administration claims to have released everything legally permissible, critics question whether bureaucratic delays and technical failures undermined the Transparency Act’s intent. The incident raises concerns about government competence in handling sensitive materials and whether additional oversight mechanisms are needed for future document releases involving high-profile cases.