Advertisement
BeInCrypto

New York AG Letitia James Opposes the Crypto Bill Coinbase Wants Passed August 3

Lockridge Okoth
Updated
5 min read
Add Yahoo on Google
Clarity Act sanctions authority for crypto illicit finance enforcement. Photo by BeInCrypto
Clarity Act sanctions authority for crypto illicit finance enforcement. Photo by BeInCrypto
  • New York Attorney General Letitia James opposes the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, arguing it would weaken state investor protection laws and harm scam victims.

New York Attorney General Letitia James says a crypto bill in the Senate would leave scam victims with nowhere to turn. Coinbase wants that same bill passed within days.

James sent her case to a Senate investigations panel on Monday. She wants tougher crypto oversight, not less of it.

Why Is New York Fighting the Crypto Oversight Bill?

The bill is called the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act. It would hand most crypto rulemaking to one federal agency, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Advertisement
Advertisement

It would also override state investor protection laws. That is the part James cannot accept.

Her office polices securities and commodities for 20 million New Yorkers. Take away that power, she argues, and scam victims lose their closest cop.

The House already passed the bill in July 2025. The vote was 294 to 134. It cleared a key Senate committee in May.

How Bad Are Crypto Scam Losses?

Bad, and getting worse. Her testimony stacks up four separate datasets.

Source

2025 losses

Change from 2024

FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center

$11.4 billion

Up 22%

FTC Consumer Sentinel Network

$1.78 billion

Up 25.6%

TRM Labs illicit volume estimate

$158 billion

Up about 145%

New York complaints

Nearly $500 million over 5 years

Almost tripled in 3 years

The average victim reported losing $62,604, according to the FBI. Crypto complaints to the bureau rose 21% in a year.

James names real cases. One scam worked through Haitian church prayer groups. Another used Facebook ads to hook Russian speakers, then ran the money to Vietnam.

Who Actually Catches Crypto Criminals?

This is the heart of her argument, and the numbers are lopsided.

State and local agencies are 99% of all US law enforcement bodies. They handle about 99.5% of criminal cases and 98.8% of arrests.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Federal authorities handle roughly 1.2%.

At the same time, Washington has pulled back. The Justice Department told prosecutors in April 2025 to stop charging platforms for what their users do. It shut down its crypto enforcement team.

The SEC closed more than 1,000 investigations in 2025. It also dropped seven crypto cases. Judges had already found violations in five of them.

Does the Bill's Ethics Ban Actually Work?

Here is the finding buried deepest in her filing.

The bill would stop presidents and federal officials from launching their own crypto. Supporters call this the ethics fix.

James read the fine print. The ban would let the sitting president park existing crypto businesses in a blind trust. It would also not start until a full year after the bill becomes law.

Advertisement
Advertisement

She wants something stricter. Officials should not regulate any industry they earn money from. Break that rule and you hand back the profits plus a $50,000 fine each time.

Her case points to Binance, which holds 87% of USD1. That is a stablecoin issued by World Liberty Financial, a firm founded by the president's family. Forbes and the New York Times reported those holdings.

Who Else Opposes the Bill?

Not just Democrats. The nation's sheriffs are against a big piece of it too.

The National Sheriffs' Association wrote to the Senate on May 13. Their letter targets Section 604.

That section would excuse mixers and similar tools from money transmitter rules. Mixers scramble crypto transactions so nobody can follow the money.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The sheriffs still want crypto rules. They just want a narrower version, written by Senator Catherine Cortez Masto.

State securities regulators piled on in May. Their national body urged senators to vote no.

Why Does Coinbase Want a Vote Now?

Coinbase makes a completely different argument. It is about China, not fraud.

Faryar Shirzad is the company's chief policy officer. He told Fox Business that the next financial system is being built right now.

China is spending the most on it, he said. So the real question is who writes the rules, Washington or Beijing.

Shirzad also likes what the bill does for banks. One whole section protects them from legal surprises when they touch crypto.

Advertisement
Advertisement

He says he has talked to Senate leaders. He expects a vote as early as August 3.

Wall Street is split. Goldman Sachs boss David Solomon backs the bill even though he calls it flawed. JPMorgan's Jamie Dimon is against it.

What Happens Next?

The math does not work yet. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said on July 23 that the votes are missing. The bill now looks unlikely to pass before the August break.

Three fights are still open. Ethics rules, the Section 604 exemption, and how stablecoins pay interest.

History offers hope to both camps. The GENIUS Act stalled the same way in 2025, then became law. But that bill never asked states to give up their fraud cases.

Advertisement
Advertisement

So watch for three things. A vote on the Cortez Masto amendment. Any move to scrap the one-year delay. And the first Democrat to break ranks.

James has spent five years clawing money back from crypto firms. Her office went after major platforms including Genesis, which paid $2 billion. Gemini returned $50 million to customers.

Now she is asking Congress to leave that power alone.

Read the Original story New York AG Letitia James Opposes the Crypto Bill Coinbase Wants Passed August 3 by Lockridge Okoth at beincrypto.com

Up next
ABC News

Todd Blanche’s AG prospects uncertain as 2 key GOP votes hold out

LALEE IBSSA
3 min read
Add Yahoo on Google
Blanche hearing focuses on Trump fund and Epstein
Blanche hearing focuses on Trump fund and Epstein
Scroll back up to restore default view.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche faces a key vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday in his quest to become the next U.S. attorney general. 

However, two Republican senators -- John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina -- have said they still don't have everything they need from Blanche in order to vote in favor of his nomination. 

The issue for the key Republican senators continues to be the uncertain future of the "Anti-Weaponization Fund" and outstanding changes they want to see made to President Donald Trump's IRS settlement agreement that the fund was part of.

Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images - PHOTO: Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche testifies during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on his nomination to be Attorney General, on Capitol Hill in Washington, July 15, 2026.

Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images - PHOTO: Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche testifies during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on his nomination to be Attorney General, on Capitol Hill in Washington, July 15, 2026.

Trump in May announced the $1.776 billion fund to compensate those who allege they were wrongly targeted under the Biden administration, in exchange for Trump agreeing to drop his $10 billion suit against the IRS over the unauthorized disclosure of his tax information during his first term, for which a former IRS contractor pleaded guilty in 2023.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Blanche faces grilling on DOJ controversies as he seeks confirmation as AG

The day after the settlement was announced, Blanche, who was formerly Trump's criminal defense attorney, signed an addendum to the settlement that would bar the government from continuing any existing audits of tax returns filed by Trump, his family and their companies.

The arrangement sparked accusations of self-dealing and a bipartisan uproar over the possible use of taxpayer money to pay rioters who attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

In Blanche's confirmation hearing on July 15, Cornyn repeatedly noted that the original settlement that first established the fund has still yet to be formally rescinded. While Blanche acknowledged that, he also said the Department of Justice would be fine with codifying in some way to assure senators the fund would not move forward.

Advertisement
Advertisement

"What I want is the written document to say the same thing he did in his sworn testimony in front of the Judiciary Committee, and, as you recall, what he said is the weaponization fund is dead. He said the audit immunity basically doesn't extend to parties beyond the lawsuit, and it doesn't also extend to future actions by federal agencies other than the IRS," Cornyn told reporters off the Senate floor on Monday.

Nathan Howard/Reuters - PHOTO: U.S. Senators vote on Capitol Hill

Nathan Howard/Reuters - PHOTO: U.S. Senators vote on Capitol Hill

"That's what we're trying to get them to agree to, which is again what his sworn testimony was. So I don't know why they're -- I don't know why they're so reluctant to do that when he's already sworn to it," he added. 

Cornyn's comments come as his team has been in discussions with the administration to amend the IRS settlement agreement; however, Cornyn said the Department of Justice has not made a sufficient commitment to change the written document to align with Blanche's testimony. 

When asked if it is safe to assume that Blanche should not count on his vote on Thursday unless he receives those commitments in writing, Cornyn, who lost his primary to a Trump-backed candidate earlier this year, said, "That is correct." 

Tillis also said he wasn't ready to commit to voting for Blanche's nomination, telling reporters Monday that he, too, is still waiting to see changes made to the IRS settlement.

Up next
Benzinga

Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, Dogecoin Plummet Even as SEC Chair Paul Atkins Sees Crypto Bill Advancing: Analyst Says BTC's Big Move 'Just Around the Corner'

Aniket Verma
4 min read
Add Yahoo on Google

Leading cryptocurrencies fell sharply on Monday as investors weighed developments around the Clarity Act and a pause in U.S.–Iran hostilities.

Cryptocurrency

24-Hour Gains +/-

Price (Recorded at 9:15 p.m. EDT)

Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC)

-2.98%

$63,157.00

Ethereum (CRYPTO: ETH)
               

-3.67%

$1,873.27

XRP (CRYPTO: XRP)                         

-4.60%

$1.05

Solana (CRYPTO: SOL)                         

-4.09%

$73.19

Dogecoin (CRYPTO: DOGE)             

-4.59%

$0.06954

Crypto Market Tumbles

Bitcoin nearly dived below $63,000 in a sharp evening sell-off, while Ethereum fell to $1,860 as 24-hour trading volume more than doubled.

Over $670 million was liquidated from the cryptocurrency market in the last 24 hours, with $533 million in bullish long positions wiped out, according to Coinglass data

Advertisement
Advertisement

Bitcoin's open interest fell nearly 2% over the last 24 hours. That said, derivatives traders on Binance stayed net-bullish on the apex cryptocurrency.

"Fear" sentiment prevailed in the market, according to the Crypto Fear & Greed Index.

Earlier, cryptocurrency-related stocks rallied, with Strategy Inc. (NASDAQ:MSTR) and Bitmine Immersion Technologies Inc. (NYSE:BMNR) closing up 7.61% and 13.49%, as investor hopes mounted for passage of the Clarity Act.

SEC Chair Paul Atkins said in a CNBC interview that he's "optimistic" that Congress will pass the key cryptocurrency market legislation.

Top Gainers (24 Hours) 

Cryptocurrency (Market Cap>$100 M)

Gains +/-

Price (Recorded at 9:15 p.m. EDT)

AKEDO (AKE)      

+41.01%

    $0.004433

Tagger (TAG)                   

+21.11%

    $0.001347

SOON (SOON)              

+18.41%

    $0.2303

The global cryptocurrency market capitalization stood at $2.23 trillion, following an increase of 1.19% over the last 24 hours.

Read Also:MSTR Target Price Remains $570, Benchmark Equity Research Writes: Why So Bullish?

Dow Rallies, Nasdaq Dips

Major indexes closed in the green on Monday. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rallied 262.83 points, or 0.51%, to end at 52,210.08. The S&P 500 eked out a narrow gain of 0.02% to close at 7,413.18. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite, meanwhile, slid 0.18% and settled at 24,932.08.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Hostilities between the U.S. and Iran remained paused after nearly two weeks of nightly military exchanges. Mike Waltz, U.S. Ambassador to the UN, said negotiations are ongoing at both technical and senior levels, but stressed that the U.S. military remains "locked and loaded." 

Big Move Around the Corner?

Ali Martinez, a widely followed cryptocurrency analyst and trader, noted Bitcoin's 3-day Bollinger Bands tightening around the $65,000 level.

"Periods of low volatility like this are often followed by a major price expansion. A big move could be just around the corner," the analyst projected.

The Bollinger Band Squeeze occurs when the volatility drops, causing the space between the bands to tighten. When the price closes outside of bands, traders consider it a potential new breakout. This strategy is used to identify the start of new trends following periods of consolidation.

Bitcoin $BTC 3-day Bollinger Bands are starting to squeeze.

Periods of low volatility like this are often followed by a major price expansion. A big move could be just around the corner. pic.twitter.com/ytFoCBIedh

— Ali Charts (@alicharts) July 27, 2026

Michaël van de Poppe, another prominent cryptocurrency influencer, spotlighted a short-term correction in Ethereum, but emphasized bullish continuation on the daily chart, targeting a breakout toward $2,000.

A little correction on the markets for $ETH.

However, if you look at the larger picture (which is the daily timeframe), it's still eyeing a continuation of the breakout towards $2,000+. pic.twitter.com/eAxCblONVi

— Michaël van de Poppe (@CryptoMichNL) July 27, 2026

Read Also:Strategy Raises $544M, Skips Bitcoin Buys for Fifth Straight Week: What's Happening?

Photo: Sodel Vladyslav / Shutterstock

Advertisement
Advertisement

Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market.

Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga:

This article Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, Dogecoin Plummet Even as SEC Chair Paul Atkins Sees Crypto Bill Advancing: Analyst Says BTC's Big Move 'Just Around the Corner' originally appeared on Benzinga.com

© 2026 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

Up next
Benzinga

House Passes Congressional Stock Trading Ban — Then The White House Gets Community Noted Over It

Chris Katje
Add Yahoo on Google
House Passes Congressional Stock Trading Ban — Then The White House Gets Community Noted Over It
House Passes Congressional Stock Trading Ban — Then The White House Gets Community Noted Over It

Benzinga and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue on some items through the links below.

Efforts to stop members of Congress from buying and selling stocks and options have been a key interest of retail traders and some elected officials for years. A recent effort to ban the practice passed the U.S. House, but its limited scope and a bundled voter-ID provision sparked confusion and sharp disagreement over what it actually accomplishes.

Stop Insider Trading Act

Members of Congress including Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) have been among the most vocal to ban stock trading for elected officials. Khanna was one of many Democrats to vote against the Stop Insider Trading Act this week.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The bill passed the House of Representatives with a 232-198 vote, with 13 Democrats supporting the bill. This marked the first congressional stock trading ban bill to reach the House floor for a vote, but differs from a separate bill that had significantly more bipartisan support, according to Politico.

Don't Miss:

Also known as H.R. 7008, the bill would allow members of Congress to hold onto stocks they already own, but ban them from making more trades once in office.

Advertisement
Advertisement

If they choose to sell, they would have to issue public notice seven to 14 days in advance. Fines for failing to abide by the rules total either $2,000 or 10% of the trade, whichever is greater.

The bill covers members of Congress, their spouses and dependent children.

Members would still be able to buy mutual funds, ETFs, index funds and commodities while in office.

The Voter ID Act, which is a portion of the SAVE America Act, was also attached to the bill.

Unlike other bills on banning elected officials, this legislation did not include the president or other government officials in the ban.

"What we want to do is make sure we're not locking out people who come from a successful business," Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) said in an interview. "We don't want to keep a successful business person from coming to Congress."

Advertisement
Advertisement

Ricketts highlighted the new rules, significant penalties, and selling notification rules, while acknowledging that members could still own existing holdings.

"You can't buy any more once you get here."

Trending: Avoid the #1 Investing Mistake: How Your 'Safe' Holdings Could Be Costing You Big Time

White House Community Note, Bill Ackman Deletes Post

Bills that support the president being banned from trading and don't include the Voter ID Act have not been brought to a vote, but may have gotten more support from both parties, something lost on the minds of those who used the vote tally as an effort to attack Democrats.

"Breaking: 198 Democrats just voted against the Stop Insider Trading Act, which bans members of Congress from trading stocks while in office. Shameful," the White House tweeted.

Advertisement
Advertisement

That tweet generated a Community Note for being misleading to social media users.

"The Stop Insider Trading Act was amended to also include voter ID provisions mirroring elements of the SAVE America Act (requiring photo ID for federal elections). Democrats opposed the combined bill, which passed the House 232-198," the note reads.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) may have predicted this misinformation ahead of the tweet.

"Congress is not serious. We are voting on a stock trading ban for members of Congress…BUT Republicans added voter-ID in the legislation. Not to get Dems to vote for voter-ID, but to get them to vote against the stock trading ban, so they can use it in the Nov. election," Massie tweeted.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Massie said that Congress should offer "stand alone legislation" on the stock trading ban act to have a chance to pass both the House and the Senate.

Investor Bill Ackman was among the voices questioning how Democrats could vote against the Stop Insider Trading Act. The Nancy Pelosi Tracker account replied to Ackman with the examples of not including President Donald Trump and sneaking in the Voter ID Act. Ackman later deleted his post.

See Also: Skip the Regrets: The Essential Retirement Tips Experts Wish Everyone Knew Earlier.

Congress Members Speak Out

"Republicans have corrupted their so-called stock trading bill with a decaying piece of the SAVE American Act corpse," Rep. Joseph Morelle (D-N.Y.) said during debate on the legislation, as reported by Politico.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) tweeted in response to the White House post.

"Correcting the Record: your shitty, watered-down bill is a bandaid on a bullet hole. It does NOT ban stock trading. It bans Members of Congress from *BUYING* stocks but not *SELLING* them. Nice loophole. Oh and of course it does NOTHING to prevent the corrupt crooks at the @WhiteHouse from cashing in on insider information. We need a REAL ban on stock trading. NOW!" McGovern tweeted.

Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) tweeted that he voted no because the bill doesn't fully ban trading.

"Members of Congress could still own and sell stocks, and the restrictions don't apply to the biggest stock trader in our government – the President of the United States," Clyburn tweeted.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) also criticized the bill not including President Trump.

"The bill does not apply to Donald Trump who, in the last year, traded more stocks than ALL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS COMBINED. It is not a serious piece of legislation," Casten tweeted.

The bill now heads to the Senate where it could face bipartisan opposition over not being a full ban, not including President Trump and for adding the Voter ID Act.

Photo: W. Scott McGill via Shutterstock

Read Next: Think you're saving enough for your kids? You might be dangerously off — see why

Building Wealth Across More Than Just the Market

Building a resilient portfolio means thinking beyond a single asset or market trend. Economic cycles shift, sectors rise and fall, and no one investment performs well in every environment. That's why many investors look to diversify with platforms that provide access to real estate, fixed-income opportunities, precious metals, and even self-directed retirement accounts. By spreading exposure across multiple asset classes, it becomes easier to manage risk, capture steady returns, and create long-term wealth that isn't tied to the fortunes of just one company or industry.

Arrived

Backed by Jeff Bezos, Arrived Homes makes real estate investing accessible with a low barrier to entry. Investors can buy fractional shares of single-family rentals and vacation homes starting with as little as $100. This allows everyday investors to diversify into real estate, collect rental income, and build long-term wealth without needing to manage properties directly.

Realberry

Institutional-quality real estate has traditionally been difficult for individual investors to access. Realberry gives accredited investors direct access to private real estate opportunities backed by a team with 35 years of experience, $3.4 billion in assets under management, and $481 million in cumulative distributions paid to investors as of Q4 2025, according to the company. With a portfolio spanning 13 million square feet across seven U.S. states, Realberry focuses on acquiring, developing, and managing real estate with an emphasis on long-term value creation while its principals often invest alongside clients to help align interests.

FarmTogether

Farmland has historically held its value through market volatility and delivered returns uncorrelated to stocks and bonds. For accredited investors, FarmTogether offers direct access to high-quality U.S. farmland starting at $15,000 — fully managed, with no landlord headaches.

Immersed

Immersed is building technology for the future of work through spatial computing. Known for its AR/VR productivity platform that enables users to work across multiple virtual screens, the company has grown to more than 1.5 million users worldwide. Immersed is also developing Visor, a lightweight headset designed specifically for professional productivity, positioning the company at the intersection of remote work, extended reality (XR), and next-generation computing.

Fundrise

Private real estate and private credit can add income and stability to a stock-heavy portfolio. Fundrise offers access to diversified private real estate and credit strategies through an easy-to-use platform, with professionally managed portfolios designed to generate passive income and long-term growth.

Mode Mobile

Mode Mobile is changing the way people interact with their phones by letting users earn money from the same apps and activities they already use every day. Instead of platforms keeping all the advertising revenue, Mode Mobile shares a portion back with users who engage with content, play games, and scroll on their devices. Named one of Deloitte's fastest-growing software companies in North America, the company has built a large beta user base and is scaling a model that turns everyday smartphone usage into a potential income stream. 

EquityMultiple 

For accredited investors looking beyond stocks and bonds, EquityMultiple provides access to vetted commercial real estate deals starting at $5,000, with only ~5% of opportunities passing their due diligence process.

Advertisement
Advertisement

© 2026 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

Up next
Decrypt

Searchable NYC Property Database Puts Wealthy Residents at Risk, Critics Warn

Jason Nelson
3 min read
Add Yahoo on Google
Searchable NYC Property Database Puts Wealthy Residents at Risk, Critics Warn
Searchable NYC Property Database Puts Wealthy Residents at Risk, Critics Warn
  • A searchable database of New York City's public property assessment records has sparked controversy among crypto industry figures who argue that it could expose wealthy property owners to physical danger.

A searchable database built from New York City's public property assessment records is drawing backlash from prominent figures in the crypto industry, who argue that making the information easier to search effectively creates a directory of wealthy property owners and could expose them to physical danger.

The controversy centers on data published by the New York City Department of Finance, which annually releases assessed values used to calculate property taxes for every property in the city. The agency's FY2027 assessment roll, supplemental market value data, and property tax guides are publicly available through the city's Open Data portal.

Critics on X said the issue is not that the records are public, but that they have been aggregated and organized into a searchable database that makes identifying owners of expensive properties far easier.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Uniswap founder Hayden Adams called it "the worst mass doxxing I've ever seen," saying the database listed nearly every unit in some luxury apartment buildings, including primary residences of people he knows. He argued the project cast too wide a net and called it "incredibly dangerous."

"Not only were their units listed, but nearly every unit in the entire building was listed," Adams wrote. "They clearly took an incredibly expansive view of 'could be' and just doxxed a huge percentage of all expensive apartments in New York City."

Helius CEO Mert Mumtaz called the database "unsettling" and said it crossed a line by transforming scattered public records into a centralized resource that effectively singled out wealthy individuals.

"While this data was largely public prior to this in a messy way they have cleaned it, organized it, singled out 'the rich,' and mass distributed it only the 50th sign this year of privacy continuing to become scarcer," he wrote.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Castle Island Ventures partner Nic Carter warned that an easily searchable database of affluent property owners could make potential victims easier to identify, pointing to recent crypto-related kidnappings and violent attacks in Europe.

"So this is a list of wealthy people and their addresses. As we've seen in France and Sweden this leads to crypto kidnappings, torturings and murders," Carter wrote on X. "Yes real estate records are semi public but this is an easily searchable database and target list."

The criticism comes as physical or "wrench" attacks targeting cryptocurrency holders continue to rise, with incidents including kidnappings, torture, home invasions, and sexual assaults.

In February, blockchain security firm CertiK reported 72 verified crypto "wrench attacks" worldwide in 2025, up 75% from the previous year and resulting in more than $40.9 million in losses.

Advertisement
Advertisement

In April, French authorities charged 88 suspects, including more than 10 minors, in a sweeping crackdown on violent crypto kidnappings. In May, U.S. prosecutors indicted three men accused of carrying out a series of armed home invasions across California that allegedly stole millions of dollars in cryptocurrency. In June, two Texas brothers pleaded guilty to kidnapping a Minnesota family and forcing the victims to transfer more than $8 million in crypto.

By July, CertiK said attackers had already carried out 52 verified crypto "wrench attacks" in the first half of 2026, with recorded financial exposure surging nearly twelvefold year over year to $124 million.

Up next
Forbes

Could More Epstein Files Be Released Soon? Redacted Docs Will Be Reviewed By Judge This Week

Alison Durkee, Forbes Staff
Updated
7 min read
Add Yahoo on Google

Topline

The Justice Department will turn over unredacted Epstein files to a federal judge this week as part of a dispute over whether they should be publicly released—potentially teeing up a set of new documents to be released, despite the Trump administration's efforts to keep them under wraps.

Epstein & Trump At Mar-A-Lago

Jeffrey Epstein and now-President Donald Trump as pose together at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, in 1997.

Key Facts

Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled Saturday the DOJ must turn over a set of redacted or withheld documents about Epstein to the court by Thursday, so that the court can review the documents "in camera," meaning privately without other parties or the press present.

The files at issue include multiple emails about women where the name of the person Epstein was emailing with is redacted, as well as FBI notes regarding allegations against President Donald Trump, documents that aren't in English and names of potential Epstein co-conspirators in a draft indictment against the financier.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Journalist Katie Phang sued the DOJ, arguing keeping the files hidden violates the Epstein Files Transparency Act and her right to report on them, and while Sullivan previously sided with her, the government has disputed the ruling and fought to keep the documents hidden.

Sullivan ordered the government to either turn over the documents or explain why it couldn't, which the DOJ responded to by alleging it either couldn't turn over the documents or wasn't required to—making arguments that Phang has alleged are insufficient, such as claiming one name didn't have to be unredacted because it had already been reported in the press.

Sullivan will look at the unredacted files and decide whether they should be released, and, if he thinks they should be, whether or not he should pause his order so the Trump administration can appeal it—which would keep the files private for potentially months longer as the case goes to a higher court.

Phang has also asked for the court to fine Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche $1,000 per day for each day the files aren't released, in order to compel the government to speedily make them public.

News Peg

The DOJ's deadline to turn over the files is the same day the Senate Judiciary Committee is set to vote on whether Blanche's nomination for the permanent AG role should move forward to a full Senate vote. Blanche's handling of the Epstein files—particularly regarding documents that were either improperly redacted or withheld—has become a major sticking point in the fight over his confirmation, and Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said Blanche needed to meet with Epstein victims before he would vote in his favor. Blanche ultimately did meet with victims shortly after Tillis made his demand, but the victims have decried that meeting as being woefully insufficient.

Crucial Quote

Former federal prosecutor Joyce White Vance argued Saturday that Sullivan's order to review the documents privately suggests the judge isn't willing to take the DOJ at its word that the Epstein files under scrutiny don't need to be released or unredacted. "The government has acted like it has something to hide, even after Congress passed the Transparency Act and Trump signed it into law," Vance wrote. "So the Judge isn't accepting what the government has represented to it as truthful, and is requiring documentation to support its claims."

When Could These Epstein Files Be Released?

Sullivan could rule anytime after the Thursday deadline that the government must release the documents publicly—either immediately, as Phang wants, or after a 7-day or 60-day delay, which is what the DOJ wants if a release is ordered. While some documents would be able to be released quickly, like materials that only have a couple things redacted, others could take longer to produce, like materials in foreign languages. If the judge rules the documents don't have to be released immediately, that would give the Trump administration time to ask an appeals court to overrule Sullivan and keep the documents private. It's also possible Sullivan could side with the DOJ that the documents don't have to be released at all, at which point Phang could ask a higher court to take up the case. In either case, bringing the dispute to an appeals court could mean the documents would remain under wraps for weeks or months longer while new judges consider the case.

What's In The Disputed Epstein Files?

The disputed files include eight emails that appear to discuss women. A 2013 email saying, "New Brazilian just arrived, sexy and cute, 19yo," is at issue, for instance, while in a 2014 email, an unnamed sender told Epstein, "Thank you for a fun night… Your littlest girl was a little naughty." In 2015, an anonymous sender wrote, "The key are the 14 to 15 year old girls—i am a sexual pervert because i say they are now of a reproductive age?" The emails go up to 2018, when an unnamed person told Epstein, "I found at least 3 very good young poor but we was so tired. I will cover up this week. Meet this one, not the beauty queen but we both likes her a lot." In September of that year, an anonymous person then told Epstein, "My favorite from Lithuania, [REDACTED], 19. Will meet when I am there." The case also concerns prosecutors' draft indictment against Epstein in 2007, which ultimately was never issued because the financier instead reached a non-prosecution agreement. The indictment has a heading titled "Co-conspirators," but four of the five names it lists are redacted, other than associate Ghislaine Maxwell. Phang has asked the DOJ to also release notes from the FBI's interview with an unnamed woman, who alleged she was forced to perform oral sex on Trump in the 1980s after meeting him through Epstein. (Trump has strongly denied the allegations, which have not been corroborated.) Other documents related to that accuser were also previously not made public, but the Trump administration then released them amid a public outcry, claiming they had been incorrectly labeled as duplicates. In addition to the documents themselves, Phang also wants the government to comply with a provision in the Epstein Files Transparency Act that requires the DOJ to submit a detailed redaction log explaining why each document with redactions was altered.

Why Is The DOJ Against Releasing Them?

The DOJ claimed in a court filing that unredacting the names in the disputed emails and draft indictment would be inappropriate, because the redacted people are allegedly victims whose names are required to be redacted. Officials also claimed other information shouldn't be unredacted because it includes private email addresses, and claimed that an email in which Epstein told an anonymous person he "loved the torture video" didn't have to be unredacted, because lawmakers had already identified the recipient as Emerati businessman Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem. To justify not releasing the FBI interview over the Trump allegations, the DOJ claimed the underlying notes were "substantially similar" to the FBI's report on the interview that was made public, and alleged the "handwritten nature" of the notes would make it harder to identify victim information. The DOJ also claimed it didn't have to release foreign language documents because it had already told Congress "it was not practicable for a first-level reviewer to determine the responsiveness of a foreign language document," and claimed a summary of redactions the DOJ had submitted to Congress meant it didn't have to provide any further redaction log. Phang lambasted the Trump administration's arguments in a subsequent filing to the court, alleging the DOJ was ignoring provisions of the Epstein Files Transparency Act that explicitly require a redaction log and making improper arguments about when information was allowed to be withheld.

Further Reading

Could More Epstein Files Be Released Today? DOJ Faces Court-Ordered Deadline To Unredact Names (Forbes)

Advertisement
Advertisement

Rich And Powerful In The New Epstein Files: Steve Tisch Transfers His NY Giants Ownership (Forbes)

Epstein Files Accusations Against Trump: What We Know—And Don't Know (Forbes)

This article was originally published on Forbes.com

東京都 · 東京2020大会から5年。新しく作られた施設は今、どうなっているのか?
東京都 · 東京2020大会で建設された6つの施設は今、どうなっているのか?
ビズヒント · 人が辞めない組織の絶対条件。大量離職の危機から復活を遂げたリーダーが捨てたもの
ビズヒント · 経営者の“傲慢”が会社をダメにする。V字回復のリーダーが確信した「組織で一番大切なもの」
SONY · ソニーWF-1000XM6進化した世界最高クラスノイキャンイヤホンが新登場
Advertisement