Last Updated on July 21, 2025 by ThePublic
The question of why the Biden administration has not released potentially damaging information from the Jeffrey Epstein files implicating former President Donald Trump is complex, rooted in legal, political, and ethical considerations. While the release of such information could theoretically harm a political rival, several compelling reasons suggest why the administration might choose restraint, including the involvement of other prominent figures like former President Bill Clinton and the broader implications of selective disclosure.
Legal and Procedural Constraints
The Epstein files, which include court documents, depositions, and other records related to Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal activities, are primarily managed by judicial and law enforcement entities, not directly by the White House. Releasing such documents is not a unilateral decision the Biden administration can make. The files are subject to ongoing legal proceedings, redactions to protect victims’ privacy, and judicial oversight. For example, many documents have been released incrementally under court orders, with redactions to safeguard sensitive information. The administration interfering in this process could be seen as politicizing the judiciary, setting a dangerous precedent and risking accusations of abuse of power.
Moreover, the Department of Justice (DOJ) operates with a degree of independence from the executive branch to avoid perceptions of partisan bias. If the DOJ were to selectively release documents targeting Trump, it could undermine public trust in the agency’s impartiality, especially given the DOJ’s history of scrutiny over politicization during both Democratic and Republican administrations.
Political Blowback and Bipartisan Implications
The Epstein files are a Pandora’s box, implicating not just Trump but a wide array of influential figures across political, business, and social spheres. Notably, former President Bill Clinton is mentioned multiple times in the documents, with references to his travels on Epstein’s private plane, the “Lolita Express.” While no direct evidence of wrongdoing by Clinton has been publicly confirmed in the files, his association with Epstein could reignite controversies from his presidency. Releasing the files could thus backfire on the Biden administration, drawing attention to a prominent Democrat and diluting the political advantage of targeting Trump.
Beyond Clinton, the files name other high-profile individuals, including business leaders, celebrities, and foreign dignitaries. A selective release focusing only on Trump could be criticized as cherry-picking, raising questions about why other implicated figures were spared. This could fuel accusations of partisan manipulation, especially in a polarized political climate where trust in institutions is already fragile. The administration would risk alienating voters who demand transparency about all individuals involved, not just those from the opposing party.
Ethical Considerations and Victim Privacy
The Epstein case is deeply sensitive, involving victims of sexual abuse and trafficking, many of whom were minors at the time of the crimes. The files contain personal details about survivors, and public disclosure of unredacted documents could retraumatize victims or expose their identities. The Biden administration has emphasized protecting vulnerable populations, and prioritizing victims’ privacy over political gain aligns with this stance. Releasing the files without careful redaction could lead to public backlash and harm the administration’s credibility on issues of justice and compassion.
Strategic Political Calculations
While damaging Trump could benefit Democrats in the short term, the Biden administration might see greater long-term risks in weaponizing the Epstein files. Trump has maintained a loyal base of supporters who often dismiss negative reports as “fake news” or politically motivated attacks. Releasing the files could galvanize his base, portraying him as a victim of a “witch hunt” by the establishment. This narrative has historically bolstered Trump’s political resilience, as seen during his impeachments and other controversies.
Additionally, Biden’s presidency has focused on unifying the country and restoring institutional norms. Publicly targeting Trump with the Epstein files could deepen partisan divides, undermining Biden’s message of reconciliation. The administration might also anticipate that any short-term political gain would be overshadowed by the inevitable counterattacks from Trump and his allies, who could point to Clinton’s involvement or other Democrats’ connections to Epstein to deflect criticism.
Broader National Security and Diplomatic Concerns
The Epstein files reportedly mention international figures, including members of foreign governments and royalty. Releasing such information could strain diplomatic relations or compromise ongoing investigations into Epstein’s network, which spanned multiple countries. The Biden administration, prioritizing global alliances and national security, might hesitate to release documents that could disrupt international cooperation or expose sensitive intelligence.
Historical Context and Precedent
Past administrations have faced criticism for selectively releasing information to harm political opponents. For example, the selective declassification of intelligence during the George W. Bush administration led to accusations of manipulation in the lead-up to the Iraq War. The Biden administration, aware of such precedents, may be cautious about appearing to engage in similar tactics. Maintaining credibility as a transparent and fair administration could outweigh the temptation to use the files against Trump.
Conclusion
The Biden administration’s reluctance to release potentially damaging Epstein files implicating Trump likely stems from a combination of legal constraints, political risks, ethical concerns, and strategic calculations. The involvement of other prominent figures like Bill Clinton, the need to protect victims’ privacy, and the potential for diplomatic fallout all complicate the decision. By prioritizing institutional integrity and public trust, the administration may have concluded that the costs of releasing the files outweigh the benefits, even if they could harm a political rival. In a case as complex and sensitive as Epstein’s, restraint may reflect not weakness but a calculated effort to uphold justice and stability.