Why Rep. Clay Higgins Was the Lone 'No' on Releasing the Epstein Files

Representative Clay Higgins (R-La.) was the only member of the House to vote against the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a measure that would require the Justice Department to disclose records related to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The House approved the bill 427–1, and it later passed the Senate unanimously with no changes.

Higgins' objections

Higgins said on X that he opposed the bill because, as written, it could sweep up and harm innocent people who are named in investigative materials but not criminally implicated. He argued the bill “abandons 250 years of criminal justice procedure in America” and warned that broad public disclosure could injure witnesses, people who provided alibis, family members and others when sensitive files are released to the media.

"I have been a principled 'NO' on this bill from the beginning. What was wrong with the bill three months ago is still wrong today... If enacted in its current form, this type of broad reveal of criminal investigative files, released to a rabid media, will absolutely result in innocent people being hurt. Not by my vote."

What the bill requires

The Epstein Files Transparency Act requires the Justice Department to release, within 30 days of enactment, "all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials" concerning Epstein and Maxwell. It directs disclosure of individuals and entities named or referenced in connection with Epstein's criminal activities, civil settlements, immunity or plea agreements, or investigatory proceedings, and covers corporate, academic and governmental ties.

The measure explicitly prohibits withholding, delaying, or redacting records on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm or political sensitivity. At the same time, it allows the attorney general to withhold or redact documents that contain personally identifiable information of victims, victims' personal and medical files, child sexual abuse material, information that could affect ongoing criminal cases, or material that raises national security concerns. Any redactions must be justified in notices to Congress.

Responses and next steps

Supporters of the bill say it already includes safeguards to protect victims and sensitive investigations. House Speaker Mike Johnson and others had urged changes to prevent disclosures that could compromise ongoing probes, but the measure ultimately moved forward without amendment. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the large House margin made major changes unlikely; the Senate approved the bill unanimously and returned it to the House in its final form.

Higgins said the House Oversight Committee is conducting a separate review and has already released more than 60,000 pages of documents from the Epstein inquiry. He added that he would consider supporting the law if the Senate amended it to better protect victims' privacy and the names of people who are referenced but not criminally implicated.

Why it matters

The legislation intensifies public scrutiny of the Epstein investigation by mandating wide disclosure of documents, while also raising questions about how to balance transparency with protecting victims and uninvolved individuals. The debate highlights competing priorities: accountability and public scrutiny versus privacy and due-process protections.

Related headlines

• 1.7 million fentanyl pills seized from an abandoned storage unit auctioned off
• President Trump criticizes a reporter during a meeting over ties to the crown prince, Khashoggi and Epstein questions
• A member of a prominent conservative think tank resigned over support for a controversial interview