I have major news breaking this afternoon. Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein are escalating their fight—and they are done waiting for accountability. This is being first reported by me, right here and right now. Subscribe today to support this work, I promise you I will never stop advocating for the survivors in pursuit of the truth, even as many around the White House want me to stop.
In a powerful letter, Epstein survivors are demanding immediate intervention from the U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General, accusing the government of releasing Epstein-related records in a way that is not just flawed, but actively harmful.
The survivors say the disclosures made under the Epstein Files Transparency Act have failed them—and they are now taking matters into their own hands.
In a formal letter sent today to Acting Inspector General Don R. Berthiaume, survivors requested that the Office of the Inspector General review records already released and oversee all future disclosures to ensure “full compliance with U.S. law and basic standards of survivor protection.” The survivors wrote that the manner in which the materials were released reflects “serious failures in redaction practices, survivor protection, and oversight,” failures they say have caused renewed harm and undermined public trust.
At the center of the complaint is what survivors describe as a “troubling pattern of selective redactions.” According to the letter, names of individuals alleged to have participated in or facilitated abuse “appear to have been redacted, while identifying details of survivors were left visible.” In some cases, survivors’ names or contextual identifiers “sufficient to identify them publicly were not adequately protected.”
“Any release of records involving sexual exploitation must prioritize the safety, privacy, and dignity of survivors,” the letter states. Survivors argue that the inconsistent application of redactions shows that this principle “was not meaningfully upheld.”
The letter also raises alarm over reports that some redactions were made improperly, allowing members of the public to bypass them “through basic technical means.” Redactions that can be reversed or revealed through simple document manipulation, the survivors wrote, “do not meaningfully protect sensitive information” and instead expose survivors to “additional risk of harassment, public scrutiny, and retraumatization.”
Beyond technical failures, survivors warn that the selective nature of the redactions raises serious concerns about motive. “Even the appearance that redactions were applied to protect certain individuals rather than survivors erodes public trust,” the letter states, reinforcing “long-standing concerns about unequal accountability in cases involving powerful actors.”
The survivors also cite what they describe as a failure to comply with statutory requirements under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. According to the letter, the Department of Justice did not provide timely explanations for redactions by the deadline mandated under the law, a lapse the survivors say “undermines both transparency and accountability” and prevents meaningful public evaluation of the redaction process.
Given these failures, the survivors are asking the Office of the Inspector General to conduct a thorough, independent review. They raise a series of pointed questions in the letter, including: “What standards are governing the redaction process? Who is reviewing the records before release? What safeguards are in place to ensure that redactions cannot be circumvented?” The letter also asks whether “trauma-informed professionals or survivor advocates” were consulted prior to publication, and if not, why decisions affecting survivor safety were made without survivor-centered expertise.
While acknowledging the large volume of remaining records, the survivors stress that urgency must not override essential protections. “This process should respect the urgency mandated by the legislation,” the letter states, “but expediency should not compromise essential safeguards for protecting survivors’ identities.”
For many survivors, the release has had deeply personal consequences. “For many of us, this release has reopened wounds we have spent years trying to heal,” the letter concludes. “When survivors are exposed while alleged perpetrators are shielded, the harm is compounded.” Survivors urge prompt action, emphasizing that transparency “should not come at the cost of retraumatizing survivors or exposing them to further harm,” and calling on federal oversight to ensure that survivor protection is treated as “a foundational obligation, not an afterthought.”