home.social

#epsteinfilestransparencyact — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #epsteinfilestransparencyact, aggregated by home.social.

  1. Update for #KatiePhang v. #ToddBlanche (26-cv-01417) District Court, District of Columbia over non-production of documents covered by the #EpsteinFilesTransparencyAct courtlistener.com/docket/73246

    There was a hearing, it ran longer than expected, and the DOJ sent a know-nothing to stonewall the judge's questions. That poor, poor attorney.

    I would have given you the blow-by-blow but the court telephone system collapsed under the weight of everyone trying to dial in.

    youtube.com/watch?v=qDD-kjBiqok

    allrisenews.com/p/judge-sulliv

  2. Update for #KatiePhang v. #ToddBlanche (26-cv-01417) District Court, District of Columbia over non-production of documents covered by the #EpsteinFilesTransparencyAct courtlistener.com/docket/73246

    2026/08/11 Phang opposes Blanche's motion (Doc 28) to stay the complaint because the rules everyone has to follow are just to hard for the Attorney General to comply with while also doing the evil bidding of Lord Vader. Doc 30.

    > Defendant’s request lacks any legal basis, and it also has no basis in reality. The Court has unequivocally ruled on the threshold issues identified by Defendant. ... The Attorney General is obviously trying to delay this case, and this Court should not condone his tactics.

    > Defendant largely failed to comply with the Court’s preliminary injunction order.

    > Defendant admitted that the redactions do not contain victim information, but claimed that the redactions are proper because they contain private email addresses. See ECF 19 at 11–12. Defendant, again, is wrong. See ECF 20 at 7.

    > In addition to his failure to comply with the Court’s preliminary injunction order, Defendant Blanche failed to answer Plaintiff’s Complaint by his June 26, 2026 deadline.

    > Defendant’s counsel made clear to Plaintiff’s counsel that his failure to comply with the deadline was not neglect at all — rather, Defendant made a calculated decision not to respond to the Complaint until Defendant decided the preliminary injunction proceedings were concluded.

    2026/08/13 — Public Hearing! Make your predictions now!

  3. Update for #KatiePhang v. #ToddBlanche (26-cv-01417) District Court, District of Columbia over non-production of documents covered by the #EpsteinFilesTransparencyAct

    2026/08/06 Judge orders Blanche to

    ① "The Defendant shall be prepared to discuss what documentation he will provide to support his assertions." because this judge will not take the DOJ's naked word for it.

    ② "The Defendant shall be prepared to explain why the handwritten notes cannot be redacted manually, or why the redactions cannot be accomplished in another way." because the DOJ's opinion is not law the way that acts of Congress are.

    ③ "The Defendant shall be prepared to discuss his timing for complying with this requirement [to publish a list of written
    justification for all redactions.]"

    2026/08/07 The 2026/08/13 hearing is going to be a nationally public shellacking with the public invited to dial in and listen — provided no recordings are made.