DOJ Claims Fired Pam Bondi Can Skip Epstein Files Testimony After Trump Axed Her

The Justice Department wants Pam Bondi to walk away from testifying about the Epstein files without consequences. In an April 8 letter to House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, Assistant Attorney General Patrick Davis argued that Bondi's subpoena is no longer valid because she was fired from her position as attorney general on April 2.

The subpoena was issued after a bipartisan vote in early March, compelling Bondi to explain why the Justice Department has failed to fully comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. That law was designed to force the release of millions of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking operation and the powerful people who enabled it. Instead, survivors and lawmakers have been met with delays, excuses, and stonewalling.

Now the DOJ is claiming that firing someone makes their legal obligations disappear.

"We kindly ask that you confirm that the subpoena is withdrawn," Davis wrote, adding that the department remains "committed to working cooperatively" with Congress. That commitment rings hollow given that Bondi's tenure was marked by foot-dragging on the very transparency law Congress passed to expose Epstein's network of enablers.

The letter has created chaos around Bondi's scheduled April 14 deposition and sparked rare bipartisan outrage on Capitol Hill. Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican who voted to subpoena Bondi, fired back on social media: "A Department of Justice with nothing to hide doesn't avoid a subpoena."

Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee and a vocal advocate for Epstein survivors, made clear the subpoena still applies "whether she is the attorney general or not." Garcia said he would push to hold Bondi in contempt of Congress if she defies the order -- a criminal charge that can carry jail time.

The GOP-led committee said it plans to reach out to Bondi's personal lawyers to schedule the deposition, signaling they are not backing down despite the DOJ's attempt to provide her an exit ramp.

This is not complicated. Bondi was subpoenaed while she held office to answer questions about her actions in that office. The fact that Trump fired her three weeks later does not erase her responsibility to explain why the Justice Department sat on documents that survivors and the public have a legal right to see.

The Epstein Files Transparency Act was supposed to shine a light on one of the most disturbing criminal conspiracies in modern American history -- a sex trafficking ring that ensnared minors and implicated wealthy, powerful men across multiple countries. Epstein's death in federal custody in 2019 did not end the need for accountability. It made transparency more urgent.

Instead, under Bondi's watch, the Justice Department slow-walked compliance. Survivors were left waiting. Congress was left in the dark. And now, after being fired, Bondi is being offered a convenient excuse to avoid explaining any of it under oath.

The DOJ's argument that a subpoena evaporates when someone leaves office would set a dangerous precedent. It would mean any official could dodge accountability simply by resigning or getting fired before their testimony date. It would turn congressional oversight into a joke.

Both parties on the Oversight Committee understand this, which is why they are united in rejecting the DOJ's claim. Mace, Garcia, and others are making clear that Bondi does not get to walk away just because Trump cut her loose.

The survivors of Epstein's trafficking operation have waited years for answers. They have watched as powerful institutions protected powerful men. They have seen cover-ups, destroyed evidence, and convenient deaths. The least they deserve is for someone who was supposed to enforce transparency laws to sit down and explain why she did not.

Bondi's deposition is scheduled for April 14. If she does not show up, Congress should follow through on contempt charges. No one -- not a former attorney general, not a Trump loyalist, not anyone -- should be above the law when it comes to protecting the enablers of a child sex trafficker.