The Wall Street Journal editorial board urged lawmakers who approved releasing the Jeffrey Epstein files to apologize after the Justice Department removed thousands of records that exposed unredacted victims’ names and, in some cases, nude images. The Journal blamed an "impossible" 30-day statutory deadline that it says led to redaction failures and called accountability appropriate. It also warned against publishing raw, unverified allegations when prosecutors have had years to pursue cases since Epstein’s 2019 death.
WSJ Urges Congress To Apologize After Epstein File Redaction Failures
Rick Friedman / Corbis via Getty Images(Rick Friedman)
The Wall Street Journal editorial board has called on members of Congress who voted to release the Jeffrey Epstein case files to apologize after thousands of documents were posted with unredacted victims’ names and, in some instances, nude images—materials the Justice Department later removed.
Editorial Faults Deadline and Calls for Accountability
The Journal said that “such investigatory materials are usually kept private to protect innocent victims and witnesses.” The board placed significant blame on a legally required 30-day deadline for publishing the records, writing that Congress "set an impossible deadline" that contributed to redaction failures.
Annie Farmer, a victim of Epstein, speaks from the podium during a candlelight vigil to honor survivors of his crimes in Washington, DC, last November. All but one member of Congress voted to compel the release of the Epstein files. / DANIEL HEUER / AFP via Getty Images
"Congress can’t fob off blame for the redaction errors, after it set an impossible deadline," the editorial board wrote. "If lawmakers have a vestigial sense of shame, they can apologize to the victims whose information was posted."
Vote, Opposition and Warnings
The Epstein Files Transparency Act passed overwhelmingly, 427 to 1. Louisiana Rep. Clay Higgins was the lone dissenting vote; he argued the bill "abandons 250 years of criminal justice procedure" and warned the measure "reveals and injures thousands of innocent people—witnesses, people who provided alibis, family members, etc." The Journal praised Higgins’ stance as "brave."
The editorial also criticized the public airing of unverified, scandalous allegations. While Epstein-era emails and other items may be embarrassing to some public figures, the board cautioned that "the government isn’t supposed to be in the business of posting scandalous raw evidence without a verifiable criminal case." The Journal noted that, since Epstein’s death in 2019, neither the Biden nor the Trump administration was able to bring new charges against his associates.
Ultimately, the editorial argued, members of both parties have used the records for political posturing even as innocent people have been harmed by the filings’ release and flawed redactions.
Help us improve.
