The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has formally submitted a report to Congress explaining how it handled records released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
The report includes the legal basis for redactions and a list of government officials and politically exposed persons whose names appear in the materials.
In a six-page letter dated February 14, 2026, addressed to congressional judiciary leaders, Attorney General Pamela Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche outlined what records were released, what was withheld, and why.
Citing Section 3 of the Act, the department said the report was required to include: “(1) All categories of records released and withheld; (2) a summary of redactions made, including legal basis; and (3) a list of all government officials and politically exposed persons named or referenced in the released materials.”
According to the DOJ, the department released all records in its possession across nine major categories, including investigations and prosecutions involving the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, flight manifests and travel records tied to Epstein’s aircraft.
Also Read: US DOJ Releases 30,000 More Epstein Files, Addresses Trump Photo Controversy
The records also include individuals referenced in investigations or proceedings, entities linked to Epstein’s financial networks, immunity and plea agreements, and internal DOJ communications regarding investigative and charging decisions.
DOJ explains why redactions were made
The department also released records connected to Epstein’s detention and death, including medical examiner documentation and institutional incident reports.
“No records were withheld or redacted on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”
The department said redactions were narrowly applied and primarily intended to protect victims and sensitive legal matters.
According to the letter, redactions covered personally identifiable victim information, child sexual abuse materials, information that could jeopardize active investigations and graphic material depicting death, abuse, or injury.
The DOJ added that certain longstanding legal protections also applied, including deliberative-process privilege, work-product privilege, and attorney-client privilege.
Unredacted materials, the department noted, remain available for secure inspection by members of Congress, some of whom have already reviewed them.
Trump among public officials and politically exposed persons listed
The report includes a list of public officials and politically exposed individuals whose names appear in the released files.
However, the DOJ emphasized that inclusion does not indicate wrongdoing, noting that names appear in “a wide variety of contexts,” ranging from direct communication references to incidental mentions, including media or third-party material.
Among political figures referenced in the files were President Donald Trump, former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Presidents Joe Biden, George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and former Vice President Kamala Harris.
Other include former Vice President Dick Cheney, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Senator Mitt Romney, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, and former UK Prime Minister Theresa May.
Also Read: Former Police Chief Reveals What Trump Knew About Jeffrey Epstein’s Crimes
The files also referenced prominent business and technology executives, including Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Richard Branson, Rupert Murdoch, and Peter Thiel.
Cultural, royal and public figures included
The report also listed figures from entertainment, royalty, and public life, including Prince Andrew, Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Harry, Beyonce, Jay-Z, Michael Jackson, Alec Baldwin, Kevin Spacey, and Woody Allen.
The department emphasized that the Act did not define the term “politically exposed persons,” and reviewers were instructed to list any such individuals whose names appeared at least once in any reviewed document, image, or video.
The letter stated:
“This list includes (as directed by the Act) all persons where (1) they are or were a government official or politically exposed person and (2) their name appears in the files released under the Act at least once. Names appear in the files released under the Act in a wide variety of contexts. For example, some individuals had extensive direct email contact with Epstein or Maxwell while other individuals are mentioned only in a portion of a document (including press reporting) that on its face is unrelated to the Epstein and Maxwell matters.”
The DOJ added that any omissions from the list would be unintentional due to the scale and speed of compliance.
Congressional oversight continues
The submission was delivered to the Senate and House Judiciary Committees as part of ongoing transparency and oversight requirements under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
The department said engagement with victims and their legal representatives remains ongoing and reaffirmed its commitment to protecting victim privacy while complying fully with congressional mandates.
Republican Representative Nancy Mace from South Carolina questioned the Department of Justice’s reasons for redacting parts of the Epstein files report. She asked if the legal privileges the department mentioned really justify keeping more information secret.
After the report was released, Mace made a statement:
“I want to be abundantly clear about the DOJ memo released tonight: Citing ‘Work Product Privilege’ will NOT save the DOJ from releasing all the Epstein files. I’m not an attorney and even I know this won’t hold up in a court of law.”
She also argued that the deliberative-process privilege does not apply to factual information. Mace suggested that since some names were shared, more information could be released without redactions.
“Re deliberative process privilege, it would not cover factual information, which is missing from the files. If they can give the names, then they can give them in unredacted files. The list is an admission that they can remove those redactions,” Mace said.
Mace also said that some federal agencies might have already given up their privilege by sharing information earlier.
Follow our WhatsApp Channel and X Account for real-time news updates.
