Thomas Massie Names 14 Epstein Associates as He Pushes for More Files — and the Political Stakes Keep Rising
The fight over Jeffrey Epstein’s files has entered another dramatic phase in Washington, with Republican Rep. Thomas Massie once again putting the issue directly before Congress.
On August 31, 2026, Massie used a speech on the House floor to name 14 people whom he described as Epstein “co-conspirators” or associates who, in his view, should be investigated and potentially prosecuted. Among the names were former Barclays chief executive Jes Staley, billionaire investor Leon Black, retail billionaire Les Wexner, magician David Copperfield, businessman Thomas Pritzker and former Prince Andrew, now known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor. (Law Commentary)
Massie’s intervention was not simply another speech about Epstein. It was part of a broader attempt to pressure the Justice Department to release more records and to force Congress to confront what he says is an unresolved transparency problem.
At the same time, the dispute has become increasingly political. Massie has already lost his Republican primary to Ed Gallrein, a Trump-backed challenger, after years of increasingly public disagreements with President Donald Trump. The Epstein files were one of the major issues separating the two men, although their broader conflict also involved foreign policy, spending and other matters. (AP News)
Now, with only a limited amount of time left in Congress, Massie is attempting one more legislative push: the Epstein Files Transparency Act II.
The proposal would create new ways for victims, state attorneys general and members of Congress to challenge the Justice Department over records they believe were unlawfully withheld, delayed or excessively redacted.
But behind the legislation lies an even bigger question: How much more is actually contained in the Epstein files, and what would happen if further disclosures revealed damaging information about powerful people?
That question has made the Epstein files one of the most politically explosive transparency battles in Washington.
Part 1: Thomas Massie Puts 14 Names on the Congressional Record
Thomas Massie’s latest intervention began with a short but highly consequential speech.
Standing on the House floor on August 31, the Kentucky Republican read out the names of 14 people he said were connected to Epstein and whom he believed should be investigated.
The list included Jes Staley, Leon Black, Les Wexner, David Copperfield, Lapo Elkann, Thomas Pritzker, Glenn Dubin, Frédéric Fekkai, Edoardo Teodorani-Fabbri, Jean-Luc Brunel, Daniel Siad, Ramsey Elkholy, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and Lesley Groff. (Law Commentary)
Massie said his goal was not simply to publicize the names.
He wanted the Department of Justice to investigate what he described as potential connections to Epstein’s criminal network and, where evidence supports it, pursue prosecution.
His message was essentially a challenge to federal authorities: if the documents contain evidence of wrongdoing, why are more of those records not being made public and investigated?
Massie has previously argued that the government cannot claim to have achieved full transparency while millions of records remain unavailable to the public.
During his latest push, he said the government was still withholding more than three million files. Spectrum News reported that Massie has used that claim as the central justification for introducing his second transparency bill. (Spectrum News 1)
His speech attracted enormous attention because some of the people he named are among the most recognizable figures in business, entertainment and international society.
But there is an important distinction that should not be lost amid the headlines.
Being named in an Epstein-related document does not, by itself, establish criminal conduct.
The Epstein files are a massive collection of records gathered from different investigations, lawsuits, witness accounts, emails and other sources. Some documents may contain allegations, some may contain references to people who had legitimate or social relationships with Epstein, and some may contain information that has not been independently established.
Roll Call specifically noted that appearing in the files does not necessarily indicate wrongdoing. (Roll Call)
The Justice Department has also warned that the released material can include documents, images or videos submitted to investigators that may be false or sensationalized. In its January 2026 release, the DOJ said it had included responsive material even when it could not independently establish the truth of every item submitted to the FBI. (Department of Justice)
That makes Massie’s call for further investigation different from a declaration that everyone he named committed crimes.
Several people on the list have denied wrongdoing.
For example, reporting on Massie’s speech noted that Staley, Black, Copperfield and Pritzker have denied wrongdoing connected to Epstein. (The Times)
That distinction is particularly important when discussing individuals who have never been charged with an Epstein-related crime.
The most controversial name may be Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly Prince Andrew.
Massie accused him during his speech of having committed sex crimes in the United States. Andrew has faced allegations from Virginia Giuffre, who accused him of sexual abuse when she was 17. He denied the allegations and settled her civil lawsuit in 2022 without admitting liability. He has not been criminally charged in the United States in connection with those allegations. (The Times)
Massie’s decision to make such statements on the House floor was also significant for another reason.
The constitutional protection behind Massie’s strategy
Members of Congress have a special constitutional protection known as the Speech or Debate Clause.
Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution protects lawmakers from being questioned elsewhere for legitimate legislative speech and debate.