Epstein Lawyer Says Judges Suppressing Epstein Info, Not Trump Admin

Famed constitutional attorney Alan Dershowitz is pushing back on claims that President Donald J. Trump or his Justice Department are suppressing the full scope of evidence in the Jeffrey Epstein case. In a recent interview, Dershowitz made it clear: the courts—not the Trump administration—are the ones keeping a tight lid on the documents.

Appearing on NewsNation with Chris Cuomo, Dershowitz—who once represented Epstein—slammed the media narrative suggesting that a so-called "client list" is being hidden by Trump’s DOJ. According to him, there is no client list, only a redacted FBI affidavit that names alleged abusers, many of whom are no longer in public office—or are deceased.

“There’s no client list and never has been a client list,” Dershowitz said. “A client list suggests that Jeffrey Epstein made a list of people to whom he trafficked women. What there is, is a redacted FBI affidavit from accusers.”

For a Nation That Believes, Builds, and Never Backs Down

Become a member to support our mission and access exclusive content.

View Plans

Dershowitz emphasized that Attorney General Pam Bondi and President Trump are “not responsible” for any withheld materials. Instead, he pointed the finger at two Manhattan judges who, he says, have actively blocked the release of names under the guise of protecting alleged victims.

“The judges have issued orders, which is why I can’t disclose things I’d love to disclose,” he explained. “Pam Bondi and the Justice Department and Donald Trump are not responsible for that.”

According to Dershowitz, most of the individuals named in the documents have already been exposed in media reports and books. And for those who haven’t? The names can be legally unsealed — if a court allows it.

“You would be shocked how few names are there that haven’t already been disclosed,” Dershowitz said, blaming the media for failing to properly investigate the material already in the public domain.

Ironically, as critics falsely accuse Trump’s DOJ of stonewalling, his administration was actively trying to release more Epstein-related material.

Earlier this week, U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg rejected the Trump administration’s formal request to unseal grand jury transcripts from the original federal investigation into Epstein — which dated back to 2005 and 2007.

In a 12-page opinion, Judge Rosenberg stated:

“Eleventh Circuit [federal appeals court] law does not permit this Court to grant the Government’s request; the Court’s hands are tied—a point the Government concedes.”

The push for unsealing the transcripts was part of the Trump administration’s broader effort to shed light on Epstein’s sprawling sex trafficking network — a network that many believe involved high-level figures shielded by the establishment for decades.

Despite the administration’s attempts, judicial rulings continue to shield sensitive documents, even as the public demands answers.

In a separate case on Wednesday, another judge denied a similar unsealing request from convicted Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, adding yet another layer of secrecy to a case already mired in cover-ups.

While corporate media outlets continue to peddle the lie that Trump’s DOJ is complicit in hiding Epstein’s secrets, Dershowitz’s insider testimony and the administration’s court motions tell a very different story.

“I don’t know of any information that [Trump officials] could disclose that they haven’t disclosed,” Dershowitz said flatly.

For a Nation That Believes, Builds, and Never Backs Down

Become a member to support our mission and access exclusive content.

View Plans

The real obstruction, as it turns out, comes from activist judges and a media industry unwilling to dig deeper into the public record.

President Trump’s efforts to bring transparency to the Epstein case don’t fit the media’s preferred narrative, so they’re ignored or misrepresented entirely.

Subscribe to Lib Fails

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
jamie@example.com
Subscribe