BY Rosemary
House Speaker Mike Johnson on Thursday publicly questioned the Justice Department’s practice of logging the search activity of members of Congress who have been reviewing files tied to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, marking a rare instance in which the Republican leader distanced himself from the Trump administration.
Johnson’s comments came after photographs surfaced from a House Judiciary Committee hearing showing what appeared to be a printed index of search records associated with a Democratic lawmaker. The disclosure ignited a new dispute over transparency, oversight and the boundaries between the executive and legislative branches.
“I think members should obviously have the right to peruse those at their own speed and with their own discretion. I don’t think it’s appropriate for anybody to be tracking that,” Johnson told reporters at the Capitol. “I will echo that to anybody involved with the DOJ — and I’m sure it was an oversight.”
The issue arose after Attorney General Pam Bondi appeared before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday to face questions about the department’s handling of Epstein-related records. During the hearing, photographs showed Bondi holding a document labeled “Jayapal Pramila Search History,” listing a series of files that had apparently been accessed.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a Democratic member of the committee, was among those pressing Bondi about the department’s release of documents related to Epstein, the financier who died in federal custody in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. Jayapal described the tracking of lawmakers’ searches as “totally unacceptable” and said Congress would seek a full explanation.
“Bondi has enough time to spy on Members of Congress, but can’t find it in herself to apologize to the survivors of Epstein’s horrific abuse,” Jayapal wrote on social media, sharply criticizing the attorney general’s priorities.
The Justice Department said in a statement that it logs all searches conducted on its systems as part of a standard protocol intended to safeguard sensitive information, particularly the identities of victims. The department said the logging was meant to prevent unauthorized disclosure of protected material but did not elaborate on why Bondi had specific information about a lawmaker’s search history during a public hearing.
The controversy unfolds amid heightened congressional interest in the Epstein case and its lingering political and legal implications. In recent weeks, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has traveled to a Justice Department annex to review less-redacted versions of Epstein-related files. The documents have been made available on department-owned computers under controlled conditions.
The Trump administration announced last month that it would release more than 3 million pages of records, along with over 2,000 videos and approximately 180,000 images connected to the Epstein investigations. While some material has been disclosed, several lawmakers who have reviewed the files say significant portions remain redacted, particularly information concerning Epstein’s associates.
Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, formally requested that the Justice Department’s inspector general investigate what he characterized as improper surveillance of lawmakers engaged in oversight. In a statement, Raskin accused the department of not only withholding records but also intruding on Congress’s constitutional role.
“DOJ must immediately cease tracking any Members’ searches, open up the Epstein review to senior congressional staff, and publicly release all files—with all the survivors’ information, and only the survivors’ information, properly redacted—as required by federal law,” Raskin said.
The dispute highlights the delicate balance between transparency and privacy in one of the most closely scrutinized criminal investigations in recent memory. Epstein’s connections to high-profile political, business and social figures have fueled public demands for greater disclosure, while concerns about protecting victims’ identities remain paramount.
Johnson’s remarks are notable given his close alliance with President Donald Trump, who has faced renewed attention over past social associations with Epstein, though no criminal wrongdoing has been alleged against him in connection with the case. The speaker’s willingness to publicly question the Justice Department’s handling of lawmakers’ search activity suggests unease within Republican leadership about the optics and constitutional implications of the practice.
The Justice Department has not indicated whether it will modify its procedures in response to the criticism. As congressional reviews continue and calls for broader disclosure intensify, the handling of the Epstein files is poised to remain a flashpoint between lawmakers and the executive branch, testing the boundaries of oversight authority and executive control over sensitive investigative records.
Original article
Comments