Full List of Republicans Who Blocked Epstein Files Vote
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Seven House Republicans (listed below) voted against a motion on Monday that would have allowed a congressional vote regarding the release of files in Jeffrey Epstein's case.
Representative Ro Khanna, the Democrat from California, tabled an amendement for a House vote requiring Attorney General Pam Bondi to "preserve and release any records related to Jeffrey Epstein."
The motion was defeated 5 to 7. One Republican member, Ralph Norman, voted yes alongside Democrats. Republican Representative Chip Roy, who missed the vote. Roy has been contacted via email for comment.
Jeffrey Epstein during a party (left) at the Mar-a-Lago club, Palm Beach, Florida, on February 12, 2000. (Photo by) and (right) Epstein poses for a press shoot.
Jeffrey Epstein during a party (left) at the Mar-a-Lago club, Palm Beach, Florida, on February 12, 2000. (Photo by) and (right) Epstein poses for a press shoot.
Davidoff Studio//Corbis
Why It Matters
The Epstein case has become a lightning rod in American politics, and the issue has fueled conspiracy theories and mistrust in various federal institutions over the past few years.
The controversy reignited after the Justice Department's recent memo concluded there was no evidence of a client list or blackmail materials, contradicting earlier statements.
That sparked the ire of MAGA voters and popular conservative pundits, who fear a cover up.
Republicans in the House Rules Committee just stopped an amendment that, if passed, would force Congress to vote on whether the Trump Administration should release the Epstein files.
What are they hiding? pic.twitter.com/FgsP25z80u — Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández (@RepTeresaLF) July 15, 2025
Trump, who does not stand accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein, has tried to steer the conversation away from the issue, saying he cannot understand why people are "still talking about [...] this creep," and urged, "Let's not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about."
There is no evidence that Trump is mentioned in any unreleased files related to the sex offender.
What To Know
If passed by Congress, the amendment would have forced Attorney General Pam Bondi to publish the Epstein documents on a "publicly accessible website."
Representative Khanna put this vote up to the House Rules Committee after the DOJ released a memo obtained by Axios, which states there is "no credible evidence...that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals."
This memo contradicts Bondi's previous assertion in February 2025 that Epstein's so-called client list was "sitting on my desk right now to review."
The alleged client list is believed by conspiracy theorists to be a list of high-profile people who were involved in Epstein's accused sex trafficking operation.
Despite calls for the alleged list and more information on Epstein coming from MAGA voters, seven of the Republican majority on the House Rules Committee voted against placing Congressional pressure on the DOJ to release records on Epstein. They were:
Republicans Representatives Who Blocked Epstein Files Vote
Charwoman Virginia Foxx — North Carolina 5th
Michelle Fischbach — Minnesota 7th
Erin Houchin — Indiana 9th
Nick Langworthy — New York 23rd
Austin Scott — Georgia 8th
Morgan Griffith — Virginia 9th
Brian Jack — Georgia 3rd
Those Who Voted for Release Vote
Jim McGovern (D-Mass.)
Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Penn.)
Joe Neguse (D-Colo.)
Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-N.M.)
Ralph Norman (R-S.C)
Khanna's amendment was a procedural measure, adding his proposal to the GENIUS Act. The Act is regarding assets such as cryptocurrency.
Epstein's former lawyer, Alan Dershowitz has also denies the existence of an Epstein client list. On Monday, Dershowitz told News Nation there is a redacted list created by the FBI of people accused of being involved in criminal activity by Epstein's alleged victims.
What People Are Saying
Representative Ro Khanna on X (formerly Twitter): "Rules voted 5-7 to block the full House from voting on my amendment to have a FULL release of the Epstein file. People are fed up. They are fed up. Thanks @RepRalphNorman. Need to put the American people before party!"
Democratic pundit Adam Mocker on X: "CHECKMATE: @RoKhanna has filed an amendment to force a vote on the Epstein files. He's setting a brilliant trap to make every House Republican choose between protecting Trump's cover-up or siding with their own base. This is how you fight back."
John Thune, Senate Majority Leader told reporters on Monday: "Those matters fall under the DOJ and FBI's jurisdiction. President Trump has expressed his views, and the DOJ and FBI concluded there is no credible evidence of Epstein blackmailing individuals." (The Hill, July 15, 2025)
President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social over the weekend: "What's going on with my 'boys' and, in some cases, 'gals?' They're all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We're on one Team, MAGA, and I don't like what's happening. We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and 'selfish people' are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk wants to start a 3rd party — the America Party — to take on Trump and the Democrats. Could it work?
In 1992, Ross Perot — a billionaire frustrated with America's ballooning budget deficits and fed up with its two-party system — ran for president as an independent. He won 19% of the vote against the Republican incumbent (George H. W. Bush) and his Democratic challenger (Bill Clinton). A few years later, Perot formed a third party — the Reform Party — and ran again in 1996 as its first White House nominee. Now Tesla CEO Elon Musk, another frustrated billionaire, seems to want to follow in Perot's footsteps and build an even bigger, better third party of his own. 'When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy,' the world's richest man wrote earlier this month on X, the social media platform he owns. 'Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.' Is Musk serious? And could his plan really work? It wasn't so long ago that Musk was calling himself Trump's 'first buddy.' After spending more than $250 million to help his friend win the 2024 election, Musk spent the first few months of Trump's second term waging a largely unchecked war against the federal bureaucracy as head of the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). But then in early June the two tycoons had a major falling out over Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill.' Trump claims Musk was 'upset' about 'losing his EV mandate' — i.e., the $7,500 consumer tax credit that has long made buying or leasing electric vehicles such as Teslas more attractive and affordable for consumers. Musk insists he is concerned only with the legislation's effect on federal spending — namely, initial estimates that showed it would 'massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit [by] $2.5 trillion (!!!) and burden America[n] citizens with crushingly unsustainable debt,' as he wrote last month on X. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' Musk continued. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' When a revised version of Trump's bill passed the Senate earlier this month with an even heftier $3.3 trillion deficit projection, Musk unveiled his America Party scheme. 'Independence Day is the perfect time to ask if you want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system!' he wrote on X. 'Should we create the America Party?' More than a million X users responded to Musk's snap poll; 65% said yes; 35% said no. 'By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!' Musk vowed the following day. Of course, there's more to launching a third party than posting about it on social media. And so far, it appears that Musk hasn't taken any of the steps required to get his America Party off the ground. For one thing, Musk can't officially start a new party until after 2028. Like Perot, a new, independent presidential candidate would first have to secure ballot access nationwide; in many states, they would actually have to compete in the 2028 election — and earn enough votes — to keep that ballot access. Then, and only then, could the so-called America Party petition the Federal Election Commission to become a real national political party — again, like Perot did with his Reform Party in 1995, three years after his initial presidential run. In the meantime, Musk could file with the FEC to start an 'America Party' political committee to assist his preferred candidates. In fact, some filings under that name did appear on the FEC website right after Musk's X announcement; two even list Tesla CFO Vaibhav Taneja as treasurer and custodian of records. But according to Musk, those filings are bogus. For now, the America Party seems short on substance. All we know is that Musk himself could never be its presidential candidate; he was born in South Africa, and the U.S. constitution requires the president to be 'a natural born Citizen.' And, at least to start, the party might not even concern itself with the presidency. 'One way to execute on this would be to laser-focus on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts,' Musk hypothesized on July 4. 'Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people.' It depends how you define 'successfully.' The Libertarian Party launched in 1971 and fielded its first presidential ticket the following year. By 1980, it had clinched ballot access in all 50 states. It remains America's third-largest political party today. Yet none of its recent presidential candidates have earned more than 3.3% of the national vote. Meanwhile, the Reform Party slowly collapsed after the high-water mark of Perot's 1996 campaign (8.4%). In 2000, it briefly flirted with Trump before nominating Pat Buchanan (0.4%). By the time Ralph Nader joined forces with the Reform Party four years later, it had lost its ballot line in all but seven states. Nader won just 0.38% of the vote. The most successful third party, at least on the presidential level, was the Progressive (or 'Bull Moose') Party. In 1912, former Republican President Theodore Roosevelt broke with his protege and successor William Howard Taft and decided to run for a third term. Ultimately, Roosevelt earned 27% of the national vote — more than Taft (23%) and any other third-party candidate in U.S. history. But note that it took a figure as familiar and well-credentialed as a former president to get that far — and even he didn't win. Because Roosevelt and Taft divided the GOP, Democrat Woodrow Wilson wound up flipping the White House with just 42% of the vote. 'I think it's ridiculous to start a third party,' Trump told reporters earlier this month. 'The Democrats have lost their way, but it's always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds to confusion.' 'Third parties have never worked, so he can have fun with it — but I think it's ridiculous,' the president added. The idea of another option — something different from business as usual — is perennially popular. According to Gallup, a full 58% of Americans said last October that the United States needs a third party because Republicans and Democrats 'do such a poor job' representing their interests. Over the past two decades, that number has averaged 56%; in 2023 it hit a record high of 63%. Likewise, 43% of Americans told Gallup last year that they identify as independents rather than Democrats (28%) or Republicans (28%) — a number that has been rising for some time, especially among younger voters. The problem is that the vast majority of self-described independents are actually just loyal Republicans or Democrats in disguise — and the few that remain generally seem unwilling to 'waste their vote' by casting it for a non-Democrat or non-Republican. Political data journalist G. Elliott Morris recently attempted to estimate the size of Musk's potential coalition by taking the total U.S. voter pool and subtracting hardcore Republicans (24%), hardcore Democrats (32%), soft Republicans (22%) and soft Democrats (20%). The America Party was left with less than 2% of the vote. When Morris took a slightly different approach — removing (1) devoted partisans (67.5%); (2) any remaining pro-Trump voters (14%); (3) any remaining pro-spending voters (16%); and (4) any remaining anti-Musk voters (1.75%) — the America Party wound up with an even smaller slice of the electorate (0.75%). Which isn't to say that Musk has zero chance of 'disrupting' America's partisan status quo the way he's already disrupted electric vehicles and space technology; no other third-party maestro has ever had his $400 billion fortune or his social-media megaphone. Earlier this month, Nate Silver of the Silver Bulletin expressed skepticism about anchoring a new party to milquetoast 'No Labels' centrism — but suggested Musk could find some long-term success by exploiting 'blind spots in the major party agendas' on forward-facing issues such as AI and the fertility crisis. 'That's what I'd be thinking about instead of just wanting to get revenge on Trump, or applying a template for third parties that has failed so often before,' Silver said. In the meantime, perhaps Musk will start that political committee after all — and spend millions in the 2026 midterms lavishly funding challengers to MAGA lawmakers who backed Trump's big, beautiful bill (while lambasting them on X). If he does, he could potentially spoil the election for the GOP, according to a new poll by Echelon Insights, and head into the 2028 cycle with some third-party momentum. 'The way we're going to crack the uniparty system is by using a variant of how Epaminondas shattered the myth of Spartan invincibility at Leuctra,' Musk predicted on X. 'Extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield.' Or he could simply go back to posting about other things on X and wait for everyone to forget about his latest big promise — as he has been known to do in the past.
Associated Press
18 minutes ago
- Associated Press
US appeals court upholds West Virginia restriction on abortion pill sales
CHARLESTON, (AP) — A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld a lower court's decision to restrict abortion pill sales in West Virginia. A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, affirmed a ruling by a U.S. district judge in 2023 despite federal regulators' approval of the abortion pill as a safe and effective medication. Most Republican-controlled states have enacted or adopted abortion bans of some kind, including restricting abortion pills by default, since the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that provided nationwide access to abortion. All have been challenged in court. The Supreme Court ruled in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. U.S. District Court Judge Robert C. Chambers had ruled that the near-total abortion ban signed by then-Republican Gov. Jim Justice in September 2022 took precedence over approvals from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 'For us to once again federalize the issue of abortion without a clear directive from Congress, right on the heels of Dobbs, would leave us one small step short of defiance,' 4th Circuit Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III wrote for the court. 'One can of course agree or disagree with the Dobbs decision. But that is not the point,' Wilkinson said. 'At a time when the rule of law is under blunt assault, disregarding the Supreme Court is not an option.' West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey, who took office in January, had defended challenges to the abortion law when he served as attorney general. 'Big win out of the 4th Circuit today,' Morrisey said in a statement. GenBioPro Inc., the country's only manufacturer of a generic version of the abortion pill mifepristone, had argued that the state cannot block access to a FDA-approved drug. Chambers had dismissed the majority of GenBioPro's challenges, finding there is 'no disputing that health, medicine, and medical licensure are traditional areas of state authority.' Appeals judge DeAndrea Gist Benjamin concurred and dissented in part Tuesday, calling it a 'troubling opinion.' 'Put plainly, this law erects barriers to life-saving healthcare for countless West Virginians in ways not envisioned by Congress,' Benjamin wrote. Not at issue in the appeal was a challenge by GenBioPro concerning a separate West Virginia law that stopped providers from prescribing mifepristone by telehealth. Chambers had allowed that challenge to proceed. The U.S. Supreme Court last year unanimously preserved access to mifepristone, which is used in nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the U.S. in 2023.
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Ethically Dubious Soup Kim Jong-Un Loves To Dine On Is Illegal In The US
Among the many notorious and weird facts about North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un is his taste for extravagance and taboo delicacies. One of the most controversial dishes he's reportedly fond of is shark fin soup, a once-celebrated luxury in some East Asian cultures that has become a global symbol of animal abuse and environmental destruction. In 2022, after years of pressure by animal welfare and ocean nonprofits, Congress passed the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act of 2021, making it illegal to possess or sell shark fins in the United States due to the brutal methods used to harvest the fins and the devastating consequences for marine ecosystems. Shark fin soup has a long history in Chinese imperial cuisine, where it symbolized wealth, power, and prestige. The soup is made using the fins of sharks, which are prized for their texture rather than their flavor. To meet the demand for this status symbol, the inhumane practice of "finning" became widespread: Sharks are caught, their fins sliced off while they're still alive, and their mutilated bodies are often thrown back into the ocean. Shark meat itself is also unsustainable, but receives less attention, unless it's the Icelandic fermented shark that Anthony Bourdain refused to eat ever again. Some shark species have seen population drops of more than 90% in recent decades. Conservationists warn that removing apex predators like sharks from the oceans will destabilize entire ecosystems, yet the demand for shark fin soup continues in some parts of the world, fueled by tradition and status. Read more: 10 Cheap Fish That Are Absolutely Not Worth Buying Kim Jong-Un's love of shark fin soup is emblematic of the North Korean regime's tendency to flaunt excess, even as most of the country suffers from devastating food insecurity and economic hardship. According to reports from defectors and international observers, the North Korean elite enjoys access to expensive delicacies like Kobe steaks, caviar, and champagne . Serving shark fin soup at state banquets or private gatherings isn't just about taste — it's Jong-Un's way to signal dominance and privilege. Kenji Fujimoto, a Japanese sushi chef who served the Kim family for over a decade, described making the soup for the political family after he defected to Japan in 2001. In an interview with Japanese media, he stated, "They both like shark fin soup three times a week." Fujimoto's stories don't stop there; he describes flying to Iran to pick up caviar, Denmark for beer, and Japan for fish. Nothing was too good for the family of Korean dictators. Many American chefs and restaurants have voluntarily removed shark fin soup from their menus in response to legal pressure and growing public awareness of its cruelty. Chef Gordon Ramsey avoids the soup at all costs after starring in an investigative documentary about the brutal practice. In a country where food is weaponized and extreme poverty is widespread for everyday people, the presence of a controversial luxury dish like shark fin soup reveals a lot about Jong-Un's values and power plays in Pyongyang. For more food and drink goodness, join The Takeout's newsletter. Get taste tests, food & drink news, deals from your favorite chains, recipes, cooking tips, and more! Read the original article on The Takeout.
