Many Republicans have questioned why Joe Biden didn’t release the Epstein Files while he was President.
The mystery surrounding Jeffrey Epstein’s network continues to loom large years after his death, and one of the lingering questions is why former President Joe Biden did not order the release of the “Epstein files.”
These files, which contain court documents, evidence, and names linked to the financier’s alleged sex trafficking operation, remain sealed or heavily redacted. Despite repeated public demands for transparency, the Biden administration maintained the same guarded stance as its predecessors — citing legal, procedural, and ethical constraints.
Why Didn’t Biden Release the Epstein Files in 2021?
Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal enterprise was among the most shocking scandals in recent American history. His 2019 arrest on federal sex trafficking charges reignited scrutiny over his vast web of wealthy and powerful associates. Epstein’s death in custody later that year only deepened public suspicion, sparking widespread theories that his influence — and his knowledge of others — extended deep into the world’s elite.
Many of the files connected to Epstein’s operations remain sealed by court order. Some stem from his criminal proceedings, while others are tied to civil cases filed by victims or ongoing investigations.
When Joe Biden took office in 2021, calls for transparency intensified. Activists, journalists, and lawmakers urged his administration to declassify or unseal materials related to Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell. However, Biden’s Department of Justice and the courts consistently declined to take that step, pointing to established legal barriers and the sensitive nature of the material.
Legal and Judicial Restraints
While some critics accused the administration of protecting powerful figures, the reality is more complicated. Much of the Epstein material is under judicial seal, meaning the executive branch cannot simply order its release. Those decisions rest with federal judges, who must balance public interest against privacy and due process rights.
In addition, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has long maintained that certain Epstein-related documents remain part of ongoing investigations. During Biden’s presidency, Attorney General Merrick Garland and senior DOJ officials stated that some of the files included evidence or witness testimony connected to active or potential prosecutions.
Disclosing that information could have jeopardized legal proceedings or revealed sensitive details about uncharged individuals. The department also emphasized compliance with the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, which protects the identities of sexual assault survivors.
Under that law, releasing unredacted documents that could expose victims — even indirectly — would violate federal protections. For that reason, many Epstein case materials were either withheld entirely or released with significant redactions.
Political Caution
There was also a political dimension to Biden’s restraint. The Epstein case cuts across party lines, implicating individuals associated with both Democrats and Republicans, as well as foreign royals and business leaders. Releasing files that could name or implicate such figures carried serious diplomatic and political risks.
Throughout his presidency, Biden’s White House avoided involvement in any active judicial matter, consistently directing questions about Epstein to the Justice Department. Officials insisted that the president had “no role” in sealed court cases.
Critics argued that this was a missed opportunity for transparency. Supporters countered that breaking legal protocol to satisfy public curiosity would set a dangerous precedent — one that could undermine judicial independence and privacy protections.
The FOIA Battle
Transparency advocates didn’t stop with appeals to the president. Dozens of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests were filed during Biden’s tenure, targeting the FBI, DOJ, and other agencies for Epstein-related records.
However, these efforts largely failed to produce meaningful results. Federal agencies routinely denied the requests, invoking FOIA exemptions that protect ongoing investigations, personal privacy, and national security interests.
In several instances, the FBI released small batches of heavily redacted documents. Entire pages were blacked out, reinforcing public frustration that critical information was still being withheld.
The Biden administration chose not to intervene or challenge agency decisions, continuing a pattern established under both the Trump and Obama administrations. Officials cited the need to protect the integrity of law enforcement processes and avoid politicizing the case.
Ongoing Investigations and the Maxwell Connection
Another factor shaping Biden’s inaction was the legal aftermath of Ghislaine Maxwell’s conviction. As Epstein’s longtime associate, Maxwell was found guilty in 2021 of sex trafficking minors and facilitating abuse. Even after her sentencing, investigators continued to pursue leads related to Epstein’s network.
Federal prosecutors made clear that the case was “not closed.” This meant that many of the underlying documents remained part of active law enforcement files. According to long-standing DOJ policy, evidence tied to open investigations cannot be disclosed to the public.
Former Biden officials have since suggested that the administration’s hands were tied as long as those investigations remained ongoing. Unsealing sensitive documents prematurely could have compromised witness safety or tipped off potential targets of inquiry.
Protecting Victims
Perhaps the most sensitive and least discussed reason for withholding the Epstein files was the need to protect victims. Many survivors, now adults, have publicly urged caution in releasing unredacted court documents.
For them, the fight is not just about exposing Epstein’s associates but about preserving their own dignity and privacy. Several have expressed fear that public release could re-traumatize them or subject them to renewed scrutiny.
Under Biden, the DOJ emphasized that victim confidentiality was non-negotiable. Officials often cited that obligation as the single strongest barrier to the full release of Epstein-related material.
Transparency vs. Privacy
By the time Biden left office in January 2025, the Epstein files remained largely sealed — a reflection of how deeply entrenched the legal and ethical barriers are. For many Americans, the issue symbolizes a broader tension between transparency and privacy in high-profile criminal cases.
Biden’s critics argue that his administration missed an opportunity to restore public trust by confronting one of the most troubling scandals in modern American history. Supporters counter that he respected the boundaries of his office, refusing to politicize a sensitive criminal matter.
The Debate Continues
Even now, pressure continues to build for a full accounting of Epstein’s activities and associates. Members of Congress, journalists, and advocacy groups have renewed their calls for the release of documents, particularly as most of the investigations linked to the case wind down.
Whether the next administration will take a different approach remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that former President Biden’s decision to keep the Epstein files sealed reflected not only caution but also a commitment to legal norms that prioritize due process and privacy — even in a case that has come to represent secrecy, privilege, and the abuse of power.
For many, that decision will remain controversial. For others, it will stand as a reminder that in a democracy built on the rule of law, even the most infamous files cannot simply be opened by presidential decree.
