WASHINGTON, April 8 - The Justice Department told Congress on Wednesday that former Attorney General Pam Bondi does not plan to appear for a planned interview with the House Oversight Committee concerning the public release of files tied to Jeffrey Epstein, following her firing by President Donald Trump.
In a letter addressed to Representative James Comer of Kentucky, the Republican chairman of the Oversight panel, Assistant Attorney General Patrick Davis, the department's principal congressional liaison, stated that a subpoena issued to Bondi last month compelled her to testify in her official capacity as attorney general - a role she no longer occupies after her dismissal. "The Department’s position is that the subpoena no longer obligates her to appear on April 14. We kindly ask that you confirm that the subpoena is withdrawn," Davis wrote in the letter.
Trump dismissed Bondi last week, in part citing dissatisfaction with her handling of the release of records related to Epstein, the financier and convicted sex offender who died while jailed awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. The DOJ's communication to the committee says that, because Bondi no longer holds the title under which the subpoena was issued, she is not required to comply with the scheduled appearance.
The Republican-led House Oversight Committee had voted to subpoena Bondi to question the Justice Department's adherence to a bipartisan law enacted in November that mandated the release of nearly all DOJ files pertaining to Epstein. Members of the committee have complained that the department's redactions in the released material appear to go beyond what the statute permits, and that some documents made public contained names of victims.
A spokesperson for the House Oversight Committee said the panel intends to contact Bondi's personal lawyer to "discuss next steps regarding scheduling her deposition." A Justice Department spokesperson reiterated that the DOJ "remains committed to working cooperatively" with the committee but emphasized that the subpoena to Bondi "no longer applies."
The committee's top Democrat, Representative Robert Garcia of California, warned that if Bondi did not appear before the panel, Democrats would consider contempt proceedings. Garcia noted that moving forward with contempt would require support from House Republicans to advance.
The Oversight panel has been conducting a broad investigation into Epstein's connections with affluent and influential figures and into how the Justice Department managed criminal inquiries involving Epstein and his former associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. Bondi and her then-top deputy, Todd Blanche - who is currently serving as acting attorney general - privately briefed the committee last month on the Epstein files. According to committee accounts, Democrats exited that session, asserting that officials should answer questions under oath.
The Justice Department's request to have the subpoena withdrawn centers on the distinction between testimony compelled in an official capacity and testimony by a private citizen. The letter from Assistant Attorney General Davis frames the department's position that the original demand for Bondi's attendance relied on her holding the office of attorney general, an office she no longer holds following the president's action.
The Oversight Committee's next procedural steps, as indicated by its spokesperson, will involve outreach to Bondi's personal counsel to negotiate deposition scheduling. Whether the panel proceeds to pursue contempt measures in light of the DOJ's stance remains contingent on internal committee deliberations and, if taken, on obtaining sufficient support for such a step in the House.
The dispute highlights ongoing friction between the committee and the Justice Department over the scope and transparency of the Epstein file disclosures, with lawmakers pressing for fuller access and fewer redactions, and with the department defending aspects of its release process. The committee has signaled it will continue to press for answers about the department's compliance with the statutory requirement and about how materials were redacted and published.