Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / The DOJ Moves To Dismiss The Epstein Related Lawsuit Filed By New Mexico (Part 3) (10/18/26)

Transcript

The DOJ Moves To Dismiss The Epstein Related Lawsuit Filed By New Mexico (Part 3) (10/18/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up everyone and welcome to another episode of the
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to dive right
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: back in to the DOJ's request to dismiss the lawsuit
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: brought against them by New Mexico. 2. The court should
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: grant summary judgment in favor of DOJ because denying New
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: Mexico's TUI request was not arbitrary or capricious. Should the
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: court proceed to the merits, the agency's response to New
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: Mexico's request demonstrates that denying the TUI request was not
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: arbitrary or capricious. APA review is narrow, and courts presume
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: denial of a TUI request is valid unless the requester
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: can demonstrate that the government has refused production in an arbitrary, capricious,
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: or otherwise unlawful manner. The court must consider whether the
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: agency's decision was based on a consideration of the relevant
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: factors and whether there has been a clear error of judgment,
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: but may not substitute its judgment for that of that agency.
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: Despite New Mexico's allegation that notably absent from all DOJ's
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: responses is any consideration of the factors, its own TUI
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: regulations require it apply. DOJ clearly considered the relevant factors
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: and determined that disclosure was unwarranted. Specifically, if determined, one
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: disclosure would violate the statute or rule of procedure, namely
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: the protective orders in the United States v. Maxwell and U.S. v. Epstein,
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: hereafter the Protective Orders and the Privacy Act. 2. Disclosure
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: may interfere with law enforcement or violate privileges including the attorney-client,
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: work product, and law enforcement privileges. 3. Disclosure of the
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: millions of pages in the Epstein files is overbroad, unduly burdensome,
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: and not reasonably related to the needs of the case
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: since New Mexico has no pending case and the requests
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: are not targeted to any particular fact or issue. The
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: court's analysis can end there. See Prometheus Radio Project 2021,
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: explaining under the arbitrary and capricious standard courts simply ensure
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: that the agency is acted within a zone of reasonableness
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: and may not substitute its own policy judgment for that
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: of the agency. Nevertheless, a closer review of DOJ reasoning
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: shows disclosure is unwarranted. A. DOJ properly rejected New Mexico's
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: TUI request under CFR 28 Section 1626B1. because disclosure would
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: violate the EFTA and the protective orders. The EFTA permitted
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: DOJ to redact portions of records that contained personally identifiable
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: information of victims, and similar files the disclosure of which
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, depict
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: or contain CSAM abuse material, would jeopardize an active federal investigation,
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: depict or contain images of death or injury, or contain
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: information established by an executive order to be kept secret
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: in the interest of national defense or foreign policy. It
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: did not permit disclosure of unredacted material. In fact, New
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: Mexico excorciates DOJ's previous accidental disclosure of unredacted victim personal information. Now,
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: New Mexico seeks that same material. The protective orders in
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: the Epstein and Maxwell criminal prosecutions confirm the DOJ's redactions
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: are necessary. On November 25th, 2025, a victim's attorney wrote
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: the Epstein Court that disclosure under the EFTA cannot come
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: at the expense of the privacy, safety, and protection of
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: sexual abuse and sex trafficking victims. Decision and order at 3.
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: On December 2nd, 2025, Annie Farmer, a victim who testified
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: under her full name at the Maxwell trial, filed a
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: letter through counsel stating that she supports the unsealing and
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: release of grand jury and discovery materials in Maxwell's case
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: against subject to redactions for victims' personal information. In a
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: letter dated November 25, 2025, a counsel for a consortium
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: of victims of Epstein and Maxwell faulted DOJ for having
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: failed to redact victim names in documents DOJ provided to
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: the House of Representatives Oversight Committee, and which that committee
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: later published, and asked the Maxwell Court to assure that
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: DOJ adequately redact victims' personal information in any material that
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: the Maxwell Court authorizes DOJ to release pursuant to the Act.
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: In another letter dated December 3, 2025, counsel for a
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: victim's family member asked that all personally identifiable information regarding
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: the family member to be redacted in any material made
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: public pursuant to the Act. With these considerations in mind,
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: the Maxwell Court modified the protective order to add nothing
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: in this protective order shall prohibit the government from publicly
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: releasing material whose disclosure is required by the Epstein Files
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: Transparency Act. The restrictions of this protective order, however, remain
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: in place with respect to the portions of the record
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: that contain personally identifiable information of victims or victims' personal
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: and medical files and similar files and disclosure of which
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: Maxwell Court additionally modified the protective order with the express
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: purpose that DOJ, rigorously guards against releasing protected victim information
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: by requiring the United States Attorney for SDNY personally certify
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: that such material has been rigorously reviewed for compliance with
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: the FTA. The Epstein Court similarly granted DOJ's motion to
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: modify the protective order subject to the unequivocal right of
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: Epstein victims to have their identity and privacy protected. Clearly,
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: the protective order do not allow DOJ to disclose New
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: Mexico's requested material. This, at a bare minimum, makes DOJ's
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: rational not arbitrary or capricious. New Mexico mounts three arguments
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: in rebuttal. First, the protective orders only prohibit public disclosure,
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: not disclosure to New Mexico for law enforcement purposes. Second,
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: DOJ aggressively preserves its ability to share information with law
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: enforcement agencies in other contexts. Third, DOJ has already released
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: the unredacted Epstein files to Congress. Begin with the first argument.
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: As explained below, disclosure under the protective orders includes information
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: sharing with law enforcement. Thus, a disclosure, even for law
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: enforcement purposes, would violate the protective order's clear mandate not
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: to disclose victims' personal information. With respect to the second argument,
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: a smattering of cases involving routine tax disputes, see ACI Construction,
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: hardly stand for the proposition that DOJ has the same
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: interest in sharing unredacted Epstein files with law enforcement agencies.
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: In any event, those cases show that DOJ has discretion
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: to share and withhold information, discretion that this court cannot review.
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: And finally, as the third argument, DOJ may, in its discretion,
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: disclose information to either House or Congress, U.S. Code 5,
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: Section 552A, B and 9. That DOJ decided disclosure to
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: Congress was appropriate where disclosure to New Mexico was not
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: a decision DOJ was entitled to make, subject solely to
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: its discretion. New Mexico's argument that the EFTA or protective
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: order do not prevent disclosure here are, therefore, unavailing. B.
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: DOJ properly rejected New Mexico's two-year request under CFR 28,
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: Section 1626, B and 1 because disclosure would violate the
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: Privacy Act and other statutes. The Privacy Act states no
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: agency shall disclose any record which is contained in the
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: system of records by any means of communication to any
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: person or to another agency except pursuant to a written
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: request by or with the prior written consent of the
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: individual to whom the records pertain. A disclosure can be
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: by any means of communication, written, oral, electronic, or mechanical,
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: and includes granting access to the record. This definition is
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: encapsulates New Mexico's TUI request, which seeks access to all
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: unredacted Epstein files and related material. New Mexico identifies two
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: exceptions to the Privacy Act routine use U.S. Code 5,
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: Section 552A, B, and 3, and Law Enforcement Section 552A, B,
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: and 7 to argue disclosure is appropriate here. As an
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: initial matter, each of the Privacy Act's exceptions provide DOJ
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: with discretionary authority to disclose records falling within their ambit.
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: They do not require disclosure. Nevertheless, disclosure here would violate
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: the Privacy Act and other federal statutes. As an initial matter,
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: the law enforcement exception allows disclosure to state agencies for
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: the purpose of a criminal law enforcement if the head
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: of the agency makes a written request specifying that particular
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: portion desired and the law enforcement activity for which the
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: record is sought. Granting New Mexico's TUI request would violate
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: this exception in two ways. First, the head of New
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: Mexico's Department of Justice, Raul Torres, did not submit the
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: TUI request. Special Counsel Sean P. Sullivan did. Courts have
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: generally enforced the requirement that the agency head must make
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: the request. See Doe v. DeGenova, 1985. Concluding that the
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: Veteran Affair Disclosure of Veteran Medical Records in response to
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: federal grand jury subpoena was not authorized, because federal grand
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: jury subpoena is issued by federal prosecutors, not head of
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: an agency. Second, New Mexico's TUI request does not specify
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: a particular portion of the Epstein files, but maintains it
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: requires all redacted material contained in the Epstein library, along
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: with any relevant non-privileged unreleased files. The law enforcement exception's
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: language and requesters must specify the particular portion desired does
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: not permit such wide-ranging disclosure. Disclosure would violate other statutes
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: as well. For example, the Child Victims and Child Witness
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: Rights Act, U.S. Code 18, Section 3509D, prohibits disclosing child
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: sexual abuse material unless disclosure is made pursuant to an
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: ongoing legal proceeding. As previously noted, there's no ongoing legal
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: proceedings here. The Bank Secrecy Act, 31 U.S. Code Section 5319,
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: bars public disclosure of certain financial reports, including currency transaction reports,
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: suspicious activity reports, and reports on cross-border monetary instruments. The
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: Pen Register Act, U.S. Code 18 Section 3123, bars disclosure
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: of pen registers and trap trace devices without a court order.
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: that are CRIM P6E bars disclosure of grand jury proceedings
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: unless disclosure is necessary to assist in enforcing federal criminal
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: law or court order disclosure. The Attorney General may withhold
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: records that contain personally identifiable information of victims or victims'
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: personal and medical files and similar files, the disclosure of
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
• 11:16
  Speaker 1: Disclosure of unredacted Epstein files implicates each of these statutes.
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: Granting New Mexico's two-year request would inevitably lead to a
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: host of statutory violations and DOJ rightly determined this warranted
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: denying New Mexico's two-year request. Alright folks, we're going to
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: wrap up right here and in the next episode, we'll
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: finish this bad boy off. All the information that goes
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: with this episode can be found in the description box.