Judge Sullivan Ordered Blanche to Produce Handwritten Epstein FBI Notes by September 24 as the Appeal Moved Up

Bis zum 2. Juli 2026 sollte das Justizministerium tun, was Richter Emmet G. Sullivan bereits gesagt hatte, dass das epstein-Dateien Transparenzgesetz erforderlich ist. Nehmen Sie bestimmte schwarze Balken von der Seite oder erklären Sie schriftlich, warum jede Bar geblieben ist. Die Bestellung war eine Woche alt. Sie nannte den amtierenden Generalstaatsanwalt Todd Blanche, den ehemaligen Verteidiger des Präsidenten, als Angeklagten in einer Klage der Journalistin Katie Phang. Die Abteilung entsprach nicht dem Geist dieses Datums. Sullivan bewegte die Uhr weiter. Am 24. September wollte er handschriftliche FBI-Notizen, in redigierter und unredigierter Form, auf seinem Schreibtisch für eine private Lesung. Blanches anwalt sagte später phang, dass die notizen umgedreht worden seien. Das öffentliche docket hat es nicht sauber angekündigt. Die Seiten sind immer noch kein öffentliches Dokument. Die AEGIS-Allianz treats the missed clocks as the story.

Politico led with Sullivan’s sharpest sentence from June 25. The attorney general had not answered Phang’s claims, and by that silence „has conceded that he is in violation of the Act.“ The preliminary injunction, docketed as civil action 26-1417, refused the government’s request for a stay. It covered at least eight email exchanges with Jeffrey Epstein about a „torture video“ and sexual activity with young women, including minors. It covered names of people listed as potential co-conspirators and names in a draft indictment. It covered the underlying FBI interview notes behind four FD-302 reports, Bates numbers EFTA01245620, EFTA02858481, EFTA02858491, and EFTA02858495. Those notes memorialize interviews with a woman who has said that in the 1980s, when she was about 13, Epstein introduced her to Donald Trump, who then assaulted her. Trump denies it. The allegation is not a conviction. It is exactly the sort of record the statute told the department to stop burying. The order also told Blanche to start a foreign-language review and to publish the redaction log the law already required.

A Friendship the Building Keeps Trying to Treat as Trivia

Trump and Epstein were not strangers who shared a photograph. They moved through the same New York and Palm Beach rooms for more than a decade. In 2002 Trump described Epstein to New York magazine as a friend of many years who liked women „on the younger side,“ a line he spent later years trying to walk away from. That history is why a department run by Trump’s former criminal-defense lawyer cannot be treated as a neutral custodian of records that name Trump. Blanche said in April, on Fox, that he had never heard the president tie Pam Bondi’s firing to the files, and that the archive should „not be a part of anything going forward.“ Bondi, before she was pushed out on April 2, told House Oversight that Blanche had been managing the review. The man who ran the incomplete release is the man who now holds the title. The court clock did not reset when the title changed.

Banks have been more willing to close their piece of this story than Justice has been to open the statutory one. The Bank of America settlement with survivors und die UBS financing that reached Maxwell’s New Hampshire hideout are civil endings. They are not a redaction log. The earlier admission that less than 1 percent of the files had been released ist die Baseline Sullivans Befehle wurden gegen geschrieben. Teilweise winter-dumps enthalten seiten, die opfernamen ausgesetzt, während sie andere namen, die das statut nicht sagen, die abteilung zu verstecken. Überlebende und aufsichtdemokraten sagten, eine halbe bibliothek sei keine einhaltung. Sie hatten Recht.

July 2 Slipped, July 30 Slipped, August 13 Was a Warning

Phang am 27. April eingereicht. Sullivan stellte einen engen Kalender auf, verlegte einmal eine Anhörung und entschied am 25. Juni, bevor der Senat sogar die endgültige Abstimmung über Blanches Nominierung angesetzt hatte. Joyce White Vance bemerkte das Fenster vom 2. Juli am Tag der Landung der einstweiligen Verfügung. Die Antwort der Abteilung war Verzögerung als Prozess gekleidet. Am 25. Juli bestellte Sullivan zehn umstrittene Aufzeichnungen, die vollständig ohne Black Boxes für seine private Überprüfung sowie für jede Redaktion bis 15.00 Uhr am 30. Juli übergeben wurden. Ms. Magazine tracked that window as it slid. Several of the department’s explanations relied on withholding theories that are not in the Epstein Files Transparency Act at all.

Am 6. August setzte Sullivan eine Statusanhörung für 13 Uhr ein. Am 13 august und schriftlich, dass die abteilung es versäumt hatte, die dokumentation über den opfernamen zu liefern, die seine anordnung vom 25 juli verlangte. Bei dieser Anhörung, USA heute and CNN described a judge who had heard enough. Government lawyers arrived thin on the documents and thinner on a date. Sullivan reminded the room that he had held department lawyers in civil contempt in the Ted Stevens case, and that an appeals court had backed him. „That’s not a threat. It’s a promise,“ he said, and he added that nobody was in trouble that afternoon. A 41-year veteran of the court does not spend an afternoon quoting his own contempt history for sport. He gave Phang’s lawyers ten days to propose next steps. Five days before that hearing, in the early hours of August 8, the Senate confirmed Blanche 50 to 49. The Bestätigungskampf and this docket are the same refusal wearing two calendars.

September 16: The Notes Are Not Duplicates

Raw Story and the court’s September 16 memorandum rejected Blanche’s best remaining excuse for the interview notes. His lawyers had argued the handwritten pages were „substantially similar“ to the typed FD-302s and therefore duplicative. Before the August hearing, Sullivan had asked why the notes could not simply be redacted by hand. At the hearing a department lawyer called them duplicates instead. Sullivan wrote that they are not. Phang had already found that the department had released nearly 100 other handwritten interview notes. He ordered these four sets, redacted and unredacted, for in-camera review by 11 a.m. on September 24. He also ordered the foreign-language review to begin by that same morning, and he wrote that civil contempt is available when an order is clear. He called contempt „premature“ only because Blanche had finally offered a reason. If Blanche thought the order was unclear, he had until September 21 to ask. The same week, Sullivan barred Blanche from filing a late motion to dismiss, because the attorney general had missed a June 26 deadline to respond.

A department spokesperson told Die Washington Sun on September 17 that leadership was not „concerned,“ and that the filings would speak for themselves. The filings spoke. On the night of September 18, Blanche asked Sullivan to pause the foreign-language piece. Phang’s lawyers answered on September 21 that he had „only himself to blame,“ that he filed at 8:46 p.m. Friday, and that he demanded a Monday ruling without first conferring, which the local rules require. Sullivan denied the partial stay for that rules breach and then temporarily stayed only the foreign-language start date so Blanche could run to the D.C. Circuit. On September 22 Blanche asked the appeals court to halt both the June 25 foreign-language order and the September 16 deadline, and to expedite the appeal. The motion’s core claim is that Congress gave Phang no private right to sue, and that producing a document would „irreversibly“ change the status quo. A proposed „Epstein Files Transparency Act II,“ which would explicitly let victims and certain officials sue, is the department’s way of admitting the current statute is being read as unenforceable by the public.

What a Private Turnover Is Worth

Am 25 september sagte phang, blanches anwalt habe ihrer seite gesagt, dass die unredigierten handschriftlichen notizen aus den vier interviews an sullivan produziert wurden, zusammen mit backup für. Bestimmte redaktionen, die die abteilung behauptet, sind opfernamen. Sie sagte auch, dass das öffentliche docket keine klare nachricht zeigte. Eine ruhige Lieferung an einen Richter ist nicht die Veröffentlichung, die das Statut beschreibt. Es ist das Minimum, das eine Verachtungsdrohung kaufen kann. Fremdsprachige Aufzeichnungen bleiben das Stück Blanche versucht immer noch einzufrieren. Ein Redaktionsprotokoll ist das billigste Compliance-Dokument im Gebäude. Die Entscheidung, keine zu veröffentlichen, während im April behauptet wird, dass die Dateien erstellt wurden, ist eine Entscheidung.

Deadlines matter when missing them costs the official who missed them. So far the cost has landed on survivors and reporters. The full Phang record is in Unser Begleiter Bericht. Readers can stay on The AEGIS Alliance Kriminalnachrichten und Politik Schreibtische. Der 2. Juli war die erste Uhr. Der 24. September war derjenige, den er noch in seinem eigenen Gerichtssaal durchsetzen konnte. Die Notizen, wenn sie wirklich in Kammern sind, sind immer noch nicht in der Bibliothek. Die AEGIS Alliance wird die Bates-Nummern, die Freundschaft und den Titel auf derselben Seite behalten, bis das Protokoll existiert oder ein höheres Gericht sagt, dass die Bars bleiben können.