This part tells the Attorney General to make Epstein files public. The deadline is 30 days. It lists nine kinds of files. It bars one reason for holding a file back. It allows five other reasons. It asks for a written note each time words are blacked out.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall, subject to subsection (b), make publicly available in a searchable and downloadable format all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in the possession of the Department of Justice”
Subsection (a) of section 2. It requires the Attorney General, within 30 days of enactment, to make publicly available every unclassified record, document, communication and investigative material in the possession of the Department of Justice that falls within the nine categories the subsection goes on to list. The release must be in a searchable and downloadable format. The subsection names the Federal Bureau of Investigation and United States Attorneys' Offices as part of the Department for this purpose. It is made subject to subsection (b). The Act was approved on November 19, 2025.
What the document actually says
“Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall, subject to subsection (b), make publicly available in a searchable and downloadable format all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in the possession of the Department of Justice”
That sentence, in plain words
The Attorney General must put these files online. That must happen within 30 days. People must be able to search the files. People must be able to save them too.
What this is about
The files come from the Justice Department. That takes in the FBI. It also takes in the offices that bring cases in court. The 30 days start when the law is signed.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(1) Jeffrey Epstein including all investigations, prosecutions, or custodial matters. (2) Ghislaine Maxwell.”
Paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a). They are the first two of the nine categories the release covers: records relating to Jeffrey Epstein, including all investigations, prosecutions and custodial matters, and records relating to Ghislaine Maxwell.
What the document actually says
“(1) Jeffrey Epstein including all investigations, prosecutions, or custodial matters. (2) Ghislaine Maxwell.”
That sentence, in plain words
Files about Jeffrey Epstein are covered. That takes in each time he was looked into. It takes in each time he was charged or held. Files about Ghislaine Maxwell are covered too.
What this is about
The law lists nine kinds of files. These are the first two. A file has to fit one of the nine to be covered.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(3) Flight logs or travel records, including but not limited to manifests, itineraries, pilot records, and customs or immigration documentation, for any aircraft, vessel, or vehicle owned, operated, or used by Jeffrey Epstein or any related entity.”
Paragraph (3) of subsection (a). The third category is flight logs and travel records for any aircraft, vessel or vehicle owned, operated or used by Jeffrey Epstein or any related entity. The paragraph gives manifests, itineraries, pilot records and customs or immigration documentation as examples, and says the list is not limited to them.
What the document actually says
“(3) Flight logs or travel records, including but not limited to manifests, itineraries, pilot records, and customs or immigration documentation, for any aircraft, vessel, or vehicle owned, operated, or used by Jeffrey Epstein or any related entity.”
That sentence, in plain words
Travel records count. That means plane logs, boat logs, and car logs. It takes in lists of who was on board. It takes in trip plans and border papers.
What this is about
This covers any plane, boat, or car that Epstein owned or used. It also covers ones used by groups tied to him.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(4) Individuals, including government officials, named or referenced in connection with Epstein's criminal activities, civil settlements, immunity or plea agreements, or investigatory proceedings. (5) Entities (corporate, nonprofit, academic, or governmental) with known or alleged ties to Epstein's trafficking or financial networks.”
Paragraphs (4) and (5) of subsection (a). The fourth category is records on individuals, including government officials, named or referenced in connection with Epstein's criminal activities, civil settlements, immunity or plea agreements, or investigatory proceedings. The fifth is records on corporate, nonprofit, academic or governmental entities with known or alleged ties to Epstein's trafficking or financial networks.
What the document actually says
“(4) Individuals, including government officials, named or referenced in connection with Epstein's criminal activities, civil settlements, immunity or plea agreements, or investigatory proceedings. (5) Entities (corporate, nonprofit, academic, or governmental) with known or alleged ties to Epstein's trafficking or financial networks.”
That sentence, in plain words
Files that name a person count. That takes in people who work for the government. Files that name a group count too. A group counts if it is tied to Epstein's money or his crimes.
What this is about
A name can turn up in a court case, a deal, or a report. Any of those count. The tie can be proved or only claimed.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(6) Any immunity deals, non-prosecution agreements, plea bargains, or sealed settlements involving Epstein or his associates. (7) Internal DOJ communications, including emails, memos, meeting notes, concerning decisions to charge, not charge, investigate, or decline to investigate Epstein or his associates.”
Paragraphs (6) and (7) of subsection (a). The sixth category is immunity deals, non-prosecution agreements, plea bargains and sealed settlements involving Epstein or his associates. The seventh is internal Department of Justice communications, including emails, memos and meeting notes, concerning decisions to charge, not charge, investigate or decline to investigate Epstein or his associates.
What the document actually says
“(6) Any immunity deals, non-prosecution agreements, plea bargains, or sealed settlements involving Epstein or his associates. (7) Internal DOJ communications, including emails, memos, meeting notes, concerning decisions to charge, not charge, investigate, or decline to investigate Epstein or his associates.”
That sentence, in plain words
Deals count. That takes in a deal not to charge and a deal to plead guilty. Sealed deals count too. Notes from inside the Justice Department count. That takes in emails and memos about whether to charge.
What this is about
Lawyers for the government can agree not to bring a case. They write those deals down. They also write notes while they talk it over. Both kinds of paper are covered.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(8) All communications, memoranda, directives, logs, or metadata concerning the destruction, deletion, alteration, misplacement, or concealment of documents, recordings, or electronic data related to Epstein, his associates, his detention and death, or any investigative files.”
Paragraph (8) of subsection (a). The eighth category is communications, memoranda, directives, logs and metadata concerning the destruction, deletion, alteration, misplacement or concealment of documents, recordings or electronic data related to Epstein, his associates, his detention and death, or any investigative files.
What the document actually says
“(8) All communications, memoranda, directives, logs, or metadata concerning the destruction, deletion, alteration, misplacement, or concealment of documents, recordings, or electronic data related to Epstein, his associates, his detention and death, or any investigative files.”
That sentence, in plain words
A file may have been wiped, changed, lost, or hidden. Notes about that count. So do logs and the data behind a file.
What this is about
This part is not about the missing files. It is about the notes and logs that talk about them.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(9) Documentation of Epstein's detention or death, including incident reports, witness interviews, medical examiner files, autopsy reports, and written records detailing the circumstances and cause of death.”
Paragraph (9) of subsection (a). The ninth and last category is documentation of Epstein's detention or death, including incident reports, witness interviews, medical examiner files, autopsy reports and written records detailing the circumstances and cause of death.
What the document actually says
“(9) Documentation of Epstein's detention or death, including incident reports, witness interviews, medical examiner files, autopsy reports, and written records detailing the circumstances and cause of death.”
That sentence, in plain words
Files about the time Epstein was held count. Files about his death count. That takes in reports, interviews, and doctors' notes on the body.
What this is about
The law names his time in jail and it names his death. It asks for the paper trail from both.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“No record shall be withheld, delayed, or redacted on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”
Subsection (b) of section 2. It bars withholding, delaying or redacting any record on the ground of embarrassment, reputational harm or political sensitivity. The bar is stated to apply whether the person affected is a government official, a public figure or a foreign dignitary. Subsection (a) is made subject to this subsection.
What the document actually says
“No record shall be withheld, delayed, or redacted on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”
That sentence, in plain words
A file cannot be held back to save a person from shame. It cannot be held back to protect a good name. It cannot be held back for being touchy.
What this is about
This holds for people in office. It holds for well known people. It holds for leaders of other countries.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“The Attorney general may withhold or redact the segregable portions of records that-- (A) contain personally identifiable information of victims or victims' personal and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy”
Paragraph (1) of subsection (c). It allows the Attorney General to withhold or redact the segregable portions of records on five grounds: personally identifiable information of victims, and victims' personal, medical and similar files whose disclosure would be a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy; child sexual abuse material as defined under 18 U.S.C. 2256 and prohibited under 18 U.S.C. 2252-2252A; material that would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, where the withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary; images of death, physical abuse or injury of any person; and information properly classified under an Executive order in the interest of national defense or foreign policy.
What the document actually says
“The Attorney general may withhold or redact the segregable portions of records that-- (A) contain personally identifiable information of victims or victims' personal and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy”
That sentence, in plain words
Parts of a file can be held back. One reason is to protect a victim. That covers a victim's name and health records.
What this is about
There are five reasons in all. One covers images of child abuse. One covers cases that are still open. One covers pictures of death or harm. One covers secrets kept to keep the country safe. Only the part that fits a reason may be held back.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “must”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“All redactions must be accompanied by a written justification published in the Federal Register and submitted to Congress.”
Paragraph (2) of subsection (c). It requires every redaction to be accompanied by a written justification, published in the Federal Register and submitted to Congress.
What the document actually says
“All redactions must be accompanied by a written justification published in the Federal Register and submitted to Congress.”
That sentence, in plain words
When words are blacked out, someone must say why in writing. That note goes in the Federal Register. It goes to Congress too.
What this is about
The Federal Register is the daily record of what the government does. Anyone can read it. So the reason for each blackout is public.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“To the extent that any covered information would otherwise be redacted or withheld as classified information under this section, the Attorney General shall declassify that classified information to the maximum extent possible.”
Paragraph (3) of subsection (c). Where covered information would otherwise be redacted or withheld as classified under section 2, it requires the Attorney General to declassify that information to the maximum extent possible.
What the document actually says
“To the extent that any covered information would otherwise be redacted or withheld as classified information under this section, the Attorney General shall declassify that classified information to the maximum extent possible.”
That sentence, in plain words
Some files are kept secret. The law says to open them up as far as can be done.
What this is about
A secret file can be opened up. That step is called declassifying. It comes before a file may be held back as secret.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“the Attorney General shall release an unclassified summary for each of the redacted or withheld classified information”
Subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3) of subsection (c). Where the Attorney General determines that covered information may not be declassified and made available in a manner that protects the national security of the United States, including methods or sources related to national security, it requires the release of an unclassified summary for each item of classified information redacted or withheld.
What the document actually says
“the Attorney General shall release an unclassified summary for each of the redacted or withheld classified information”
That sentence, in plain words
A short open write-up must come out instead. There must be one for each secret file held back.
What this is about
Sometimes a file must stay secret to keep the country safe. A summary says what the file is about. It leaves the secret parts out. So the public learns something even so.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“All decisions to classify any covered information after July 1, 2025 shall be published in the Federal Register and submitted to Congress, including the date of classification, the identity of the classifying authority, and an unclassified summary of the justification.”
Paragraph (4) of subsection (c). It requires every decision to classify covered information after July 1, 2025 to be published in the Federal Register and submitted to Congress, together with the date of classification, the identity of the classifying authority and an unclassified summary of the justification.
What the document actually says
“All decisions to classify any covered information after July 1, 2025 shall be published in the Federal Register and submitted to Congress, including the date of classification, the identity of the classifying authority, and an unclassified summary of the justification.”
That sentence, in plain words
Some files were made secret after July 1, 2025. Each of those calls must be written up. The write-up goes in the Federal Register and to Congress.
What this is about
The write-up must give the date. It must name who made the call. It must say why, in words anyone can read.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
Each thing the section requires: the 30 day deadline and the format of the release, the nine categories of records the release covers, the ground the section bars for withholding, the five grounds it allows, the written justification for a redaction, the duty to declassify, the unclassified summary owed where declassifying is refused, and the publication of classification decisions made after July 1, 2025.
Nothing in the section is left out. Every subsection and paragraph is recorded.
The section cites other statutes for the meaning of child sexual abuse material (18 U.S.C. 2256, and 18 U.S.C. 2252-2252A), and it leaves the test for classified information to an Executive order it does not name. Those documents are not indexed here, so nothing recorded here says what they contain.
