Bondi Dodges Epstein Files Testimony After Trump Fires Her

Pam Bondi is trying to wriggle out of testifying about the Justice Department's disastrous handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files by claiming she can't be compelled to appear now that Donald Trump fired her.

The Department of Justice informed the House Oversight Committee this week that Bondi will not show up for her scheduled April 14 deposition because she's "no longer attorney general" and was subpoenaed in her official capacity. It's a convenient technicality for someone who oversaw a release of Epstein case files that was riddled with errors and missed a congressional deadline.

But lawmakers from both parties aren't buying it.

Bipartisan Push for Accountability

Rep. Nancy Mace, the South Carolina Republican who initiated the motion to subpoena Bondi, made clear on social media that "Bondi cannot escape accountability simply because she no longer holds the office of Attorney General." Mace emphasized that the subpoena was issued "by name, not by title" and expects Bondi to appear once a new date is set.

The committee's top Democrat, Rep. Robert Garcia of California, went further, threatening contempt of Congress charges if Bondi refuses to testify. "Now that Pam Bondi has been fired, she's trying to get out of her legal obligation to testify before the Oversight Committee about the Epstein files and the White House cover-up," Garcia said in a statement.

The bipartisan subpoena, issued last month, came after mounting frustration with how DOJ handled the court-ordered release of millions of pages of case files related to Epstein, the financier who sexually abused underage girls for years while maintaining connections to powerful figures in politics, business, and entertainment.

A Pattern of Obstruction

The Epstein files release under Bondi's watch was a mess from the start. The department missed deadlines set by Congress and released documents containing multiple errors that raised questions about whether DOJ was deliberately slow-walking transparency or simply incompetent in managing one of the most high-profile document releases in recent memory.

Those failures are exactly what the House Oversight Committee wants to question Bondi about under oath. The fact that she's now trying to avoid that testimony by hiding behind her firing only deepens suspicions about what she might reveal.

Jessica Collins, a spokeswoman for the committee, said they will contact Bondi's personal counsel to discuss next steps for scheduling the interview. Translation: this isn't over.

The Awkward Transition

Bondi's situation is legally murky in ways that seem almost designed to create confusion. After Trump announced her ouster on April 2, Bondi claimed on social media she would spend the next month "working tirelessly to transition the office." But Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has already been elevated to perform the duties of attorney general, at least on an acting basis.

As of Wednesday, the Justice Department's website still listed Bondi as attorney general, even though she's clearly on her way out and apparently believes she's no longer bound by subpoenas issued to her in that role.

Precedent for Enforcement

Committee chair Rep. James Comer of Kentucky has shown he's willing to enforce subpoenas against high-ranking former officials. Earlier this year, he compelled testimony from Bill and Hillary Clinton, making them among the highest-ranking former government officials ever subpoenaed by Congress.

If Comer applies the same standard to Bondi that he applied to the Clintons, she'll have a hard time avoiding the witness chair. And if she continues to refuse, she could face contempt charges that would make her legal problems significantly worse than simply answering questions about why DOJ bungled the Epstein files release.

The survivors of Epstein's abuse and the public deserve answers about how the Justice Department handled evidence in one of the most consequential sex trafficking cases in American history. Bondi's attempt to dodge accountability by claiming her firing exempts her from congressional oversight is exactly the kind of maneuver that erodes trust in institutions that are supposed to serve justice, not protect the powerful.