Epstein files slip from midterm focus as advocates seek renewed scrutiny

A proposed transparency bill targets enforcement gaps as disclosure disputes continue

As U.S. voters head to the polls for the 2026 midterm elections, Republican strategist Brittany Martinez said immediate concerns such as affordability, gas prices and AI could push the Jeffrey Epstein investigation out of the daily conversation. Survivors’ advocates and political analysts nevertheless said the issue was likely to persist and could regain congressional attention after the House returns from recess.

Spencer Kuvin of Goldlaw, who represents multiple Epstein survivors, said his greatest concern was not that the public would forget Epstein but that politicians and institutions responsible for accountability would use chaos surrounding world events as an excuse to move on. He said wars, economic crises and political controversies may dominate headlines without erasing survivors’ suffering or unanswered questions about how Epstein and his powerful associates were allowed to operate for decades.

Kuvin called for the US government to continue releasing Epstein files and Congress to demand accountability. “Justice should not have an expiration date, and it certainly should not be dictated by the news cycle,” he said.

Jennifer Freeman of Marsh Law, who represents Epstein survivors in litigation, said it had been disappointing to see attention diverted during the past year. She nevertheless remained confident that the case would command concentration and accountability shortly again because of the electoral cycle.

Freeman said she is continuing to pursue a lawsuit against the US government alleging negligence in repeatedly failing, for decades, to investigate and prosecute Epstein. She is also litigating a class action against Epstein’s estate related to his collection and production of child sex abuse images.

Martinez, acting director of Principles First, said people can care about several things at once, but worries directly affecting their lives take priority. She pointed to gas prices, living costs and whether the government is working for them. “I don’t think the questions or the demand for answers have gone away; they’re just competing for attention,” she said, adding that she expects less attention in stretches rather than disappearance.

Congress is in recess and has no members on the House floor, leaving no discussion of the proposed Epstein Files Transparency Act II. The proposal seeks to address what advocates describe as shortfalls in the present law, including the absence of enforcement mechanisms.

Shawn Donahue, a clinical associate professor in the University at Buffalo’s political science department, said the issue would likely become more prominent when Congress returns, particularly if Democrats sought control of one or both chambers. With polls projecting a Democratic House win, Donahue expected them to “put Republicans on the spot” over Epstein and said Democrats were ready to start the investigation “from day one.”

Julie Roginsky, who co-founded the nonprofit Lift Our Voices and pursued a sexual harassment lawsuit against former Fox News CEO Roger Ailes, said Epstein was part of the reason Trump’s numbers were at record lows and an issue on which even Maga Republicans had broken with him. She said if Democrats gained control of at least one chamber, discussion of survivors and Epstein would increase the following year.

Democratic New Mexico representative Teresa Leger Fernández said the issue was bigger than an election moment and represented a reckoning over power, abuse and protection. She said voters would focus on groceries, gas and rent but would not forget what she described as Trump’s friendship with Epstein and his effort to hide the truth.

“The survivors have fought for decades to be heard. Our responsibility is to keep fighting alongside them, get the truth out, and hold those responsible accountable,” Leger Fernández said. “That responsibility doesn’t disappear when the headlines change.”

Massachusetts Democratic representative Ayanna Pressley said justice for survivors had remained prominent among the electorate because, in her view, people of conscience could see through Trump administration cover-ups and demand accountability. She said efforts to distract the public would not change that. Pressley, Leger Fernández and Deborah Ross recently introduced legislation addressing survivors’ financial burdens.

New Mexico Democratic senator Ben Ray Luján said he would continue pushing for the full release of Epstein files despite the Justice Department’s position that it has released all investigative files required by law. “We cannot lose sight of the need to release the full Epstein files, hold those responsible accountable, and ensure survivors receive the justice they deserve,” he said.

Asked for comment, the White House insisted Trump had advocated for survivors. Spokeswoman Lauren Bis said Trump had been “totally exonerated on anything relating to Epstein.” She said he released thousands of pages of documents, cooperated with a House Oversight Committee subpoena request, signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act and called for more investigations into what she described as Epstein’s Democratic friends.

Bis said Trump had done more for Epstein’s victims than anyone before him. The White House statement also said several Democrats had yet to explain why they were soliciting money and meetings from Epstein after his conviction as a sex offender.

The Justice Department said it complied with the original Epstein Files Transparency Act and rejected New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez’s claim that the department was not helping the state investigation. It said the law and protective orders in the Southern District of New York do not require or permit disclosure of victim-identifying information carte blanche, and New Mexico had provided no lawful basis to justify sweeping disclosures.

“Protecting victim privacy remains a top priority for the Department, and neither [legal] requests nor a desire to cooperate outweighs that privacy,” the department said. It added that it remains available to assist New Mexico’s investigation consistent with the law and binding court orders.

The unresolved questions are whether Congress will add enforcement mechanisms, whether federal privacy orders permit fuller disclosure and whether proposed survivor legislation will advance. Advocates say the urgency of survivors’ claims will not disappear when another issue dominates the news cycle, while the White House and Justice Department dispute the premise that additional records should be released.