
The House is looking into the Epstein investigation. Here's what could happen next
The Republican-led House Oversight and Government Reform Committee acted just before House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., sent lawmakers home early for a monthlong break from Washington. The committee's moves are evidence of the mounting pressure for disclosure in a case that Trump has unsuccessfully urged his supporters to move past. But they were also just the start of what can be a drawn out process.
Here's what could happen next in the House inquiry as lawmakers seek answers in a case that has sparked rampant speculation since Epstein's death in 2019 and more recently caused many in the Trump administration to renege on promises for a complete accounting.
Subpoena for the Epstein files
Democrats, joined by three Republicans, were able to successfully initiate the subpoena from a subcommittee just as the House was leaving Washington for its August recess. But it was just the start of negotiations over the subpoena.
The subcommittee agreed to redact the names and personal information of any victims, but besides that, their demand for information is quite broad, encompassing 'un-redacted Epstein files.'
As the parameters of the subpoena are drafted, Democrats are demanding that it be fulfilled within 30 days from when it is served to Attorney General Pam Bondi. They have also proposed a list of document demands, including the prosecutorial decisions surrounding Epstein, documents related to his death, and communication from any president or executive official regarding the matter.
Ultimately, Republicans who control the committee will have more power over the scope of the subpoena, but the fact that it was approved with a strong bipartisan vote gives it some heft.
The committee chairman, Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., said he told the speaker that 'Republicans on the Oversight Committee were going to move to be more aggressive in trying to get transparency with the Epstein files. So, we did that, and I think that's what the American people want.'
Will Congress depose Ghislaine Maxwell?
Comer has said that he is hoping that staff from the committee can interview Maxwell under oath on Aug. 11 at or near the federal prison in Florida where she is serving a lengthy sentence for child sex trafficking.
In a congressional deposition, the subject typically has an attorney present to help them answer — or not answer — questions while maintaining their civil rights. Subjects also have the ability to decline to answer questions if it could be used against them in a criminal case, though in this instance that might not matter because Maxwell has already been convicted of many of the things she will likely be asked about.
Maxwell has the ability to negotiate some of the terms of the deposition, and she already conducted 1 1/2 days of interviews with Justice Department officials this past week.
Democrats, however, warn that Maxwell is not to be trusted.
'We should understand that this is a very complex witness and someone that has caused great harm and not a good person to a lot of people,' Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the oversight committee, told reporters this week.
The House wants to subpoena others
Committee Republicans also initiated a motion to subpoena a host of other people, including former President Bill Clinton, former Sen. Hillary Clinton as well as the former attorneys general dating back to Alberto Gonzales, who served under George W. Bush.
It's not clear how this sweeping list of proposed subpoenas will actually play out, but Comer has said, 'We're going to move quickly on that.'
How will Pam Bondi comply?
Trump is no stranger to fighting against congressional investigations and subpoenas. And as with most subpoenas, the Justice Department can negotiate the terms of how it fulfills the subpoena. It can also make legal arguments against handing over certain information.
Joshua A. Levy, who teaches on congressional investigations at Georgetown Law School and is a partner at Levy Firestone Muse, said that the results of the subpoena 'depend on whether the administration wants to work through the traditional accommodation process with the House and reach a resolution or if one or both sides becomes entrenched in its position.'
If Congress is not satisfied with Bondi's response — or if she were to refuse to hand over any information — there are several ways lawmakers can try to enforce the subpoena. However, that would require a vote to hold Bondi in contempt of Congress.
It's practically unheard of for one political party to vote to hold one of its own members in contempt of Congress, but the Epstein saga has also cut across political lines and driven a wedge in the GOP.
Growing pressure on the Trump adminitration for disclosure
Ultimately, the bipartisan vote to subpoena the files showed how political pressure is mounting on the Trump administration to disclose the files. Politics, policy and the law are all bound up together in this case, and many in Congress want to see a full accounting of the sex trafficking investigation.
'We can't allow individuals, especially those at the highest level of our government, to protect child sex traffickers,' said Rep. Summer Lee, D-Pa., a committee member.
The Trump administration is already facing the potential for even more political tension. When Congress comes back to Washington in September, a bipartisan group of House lawmakers is working to advance to a full House vote a bill that aims to force the public release of the Epstein files.
___
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Winnipeg Free Press
28 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
As Trump's trade deal deadline approaches, his tariffs face legal pushback in court
WASHINGTON – Donald Trump's plan to realign global trade faces its latest legal barrier this week in a federal appeals court — and Canada is bracing for the U.S. president to follow through on his threat to impose higher tariffs. While Trump set an Aug. 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the United States, the president's ultimatum has so far resulted in only a handful of frameworks for trade agreements. Deals have been announced for Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom — but Trump indicated last week that an agreement with Canada is far from complete. 'We don't have a deal with Canada, we haven't been focused on it,' Trump told reporters Friday. Trump sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney threatening to impose 35 per cent tariffs if Canada doesn't make a trade deal by the deadline. The White House has said those duties would not apply to goods compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Canadian officials have also downplayed expectations of a new economic and security agreement materializing by Friday. 'We'll use all the time that's necessary,' Carney said last week. Countries around the world will also be watching as Trump's use of a national security statute to hit nations with tariffs faces scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. No previous president had ever used it for tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. The Trump administration quickly appealed the lower court's ruling on the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs and arguments are set to be heard in the appeal court on Thursday. The hearing combines two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One involves five American small businesses arguing specifically against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other came from 12 states pushing back on both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs. George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called Trump's tariff actions a 'massive power grab.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, is representing the American small businesses. 'We are hopeful — we can't know for sure obviously — we are hopeful that we will continue to prevail in court,' Somin said. Somin said they are arguing that IEEPA does not 'give the president the power to impose any tariff he wants, on any nation, for any reason, for as long as he wants, whenever he feels like it.' He added that 'the law also says there must be an emergency and an unusual and extraordinary threat to American security or the economy' — and neither the flow of fentanyl from Canada nor a trade deficit meet that definition. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. The White House has said the Trump administration is legally using powers granted to the executive branch by the Constitution and Congress to address America's 'national emergencies of persistent goods trade deficits and drug trafficking.' There have been 18 amicus briefs — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — filed in support of the small businesses and states pushing against Trump's tariffs. Two were filed in support of the Trump administration's actions. Brent Skorup, a legal fellow at the Washington-based Cato Institute, said the Trump administration is taking a vague statute and claiming powers never deployed by a president before. The Cato Institute submitted a brief that argued 'the Constitution specifies that Congress has the power to set tariffs and duties.' Skorup said there are serious issues with the Trump administration's interpretation of IEEPA. 'We don't want power consolidated into a single king or president,' he said. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. It's expected the appeals court will expedite its ruling. Even if it rules against the duties, however, they may not be immediately lifted. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this.' There are at least eight lawsuits challenging the tariffs. Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties. This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 27, 2025.


Toronto Star
an hour ago
- Toronto Star
At least 21 killed in attack on east Congo church by Islamic State-backed rebels, civil leader says
KINSHASA, Congo (AP) — At least 21 people were killed on Sunday in an attack on church premises in eastern Congo by Islamic State-backed rebels, according to a civil society leader. The attack was carried out by members of the Allied Democratic Force (ADF) around 1 am inside the premises of a Catholic church in eastern Congo's Komanda. Several houses and shops were also burnt.


Toronto Star
an hour ago
- Toronto Star
Warsaw archbishop asks Vatican to defrock Polish priest charged with the killing of a homeless man
WARSAW, Poland (AP) — The archbishop of Warsaw, Poland, has asked the Vatican to defrock a priest charged with the killing of a 68-year-old homeless man who was beaten with an axe and set on fire. Prosecutors on Saturday charged the priest, only identified as Mirosław M. in line with Polish privacy rules, with murder with particular cruelty. He is being detained ahead of a trial and faces 15 years to life behind bars.