Government Supplemental Brief on Epstein Grand Jury Release
From: U.S. Department of JusticeTo: U.S. District Court, S.D. Florida, Southern District of New York
Government BriefTransfer RequestPublic InterestEFTA02819488
UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO ORDER ON SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING
In re: Grand Jury 05-02 (WPB) and 07-103 (WPB)
S.D. Florida, No. 9:25-mc-80920
Filed: July 20, 2025
This supplemental brief answered the court's questions about transfer and unsealing. DOJ first argued that the Florida petition was eligible for transfer to the Southern District of New York under Rule 6(e)(3)(G). The Government's theory was that the petition arose from the public federal prosecution history in New York, including the 2019 Epstein indictment and the later Maxwell criminal trial, and that those proceedings were the only judicial proceedings tied to the requested disclosure.
The brief also addressed the underlying request to release the transcripts. DOJ acknowledged the difficulty created by Eleventh Circuit precedent, especially Pitch v. United States, which holds that district courts in that circuit may not disclose grand jury materials outside Rule 6(e)'s enumerated exceptions. At the same time, DOJ argued that other circuits have allowed release in special circumstances involving historical importance and strong public interest. The Government preserved that argument while recognizing that the Florida district court was bound by Eleventh Circuit law.
The filing is significant because it shows DOJ's fallback structure. If the Florida court could not itself unseal the materials, DOJ wanted the matter transferred to a court connected to the New York Epstein and Maxwell prosecutions. If the Florida court kept the case, DOJ asked it to treat the extraordinary public interest in Epstein's investigation as sufficient reason to release the records or to preserve the issue for higher-court review.
For researchers, this document captures the legal tension before Congress intervened: public transparency was being asserted through ordinary Rule 6(e) procedure, but existing Eleventh Circuit law sharply constrained that path.
Source: DOJ Epstein Library / S.D. Fla.
Available at: https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/Court%20Records/In%20re%20Grand%20Jury%2005-02%20%28WPB%29%20%26%2007-103%20%28WPB%29%2C%20No.%20925-mc-80920%20%28S.D.%20Fla.%202025%29/EFTA02819488.pdf