New Mexico Accuses DOJ of Obstructing Epstein Probe

New Mexico AG publishes letter accusing DOJ of stonewalling

New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez made public on July 9 a June 30 letter he sent to the U.S. Department of Justice, accusing the federal agency of impeding the state’s criminal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s activities at his former Zorro Ranch property south of Santa Fe. The letter, addressed to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, alleges that the DOJ has failed to provide unredacted records requested by Torrez’s office in February, despite repeated follow-ups and “verbal assurances of cooperation,” according to Al Jazeera. Torrez, a Democrat, said more than 130 days had elapsed without substantive response and described the delay as “unreasonable under any rule of reason,” as reported by The Straits Times.

The records in question, according to the New York Times, contain the names of Epstein survivors, witnesses, co-conspirators and other individuals who could aid the long-delayed state investigation. “The U.S.D.O.J.’s continued withholding of unredacted records is causing real and escalating harm,” Torrez wrote, arguing that each day of delay erodes the foundation of a potential prosecution.

What the DOJ says

A Justice Department spokeswoman, Kiersten Pels, rejected the accusation and told the New York Times that the agency “welcomes New Mexico undertaking additional investigation of the Zorro Ranch and stands ready to provide necessary assistance with New Mexico’s investigation.” Separately, a DOJ spokesperson told other U.S. media, including in reporting cited by The Straits Times, that the department had responded to the state’s request in June and stood ready to investigate or prosecute any federal crimes the New Mexico probe uncovered.

The two formulations differ in substance: Pels’s statement emphasizes openness to cooperation without confirming production of records, while the second spokesperson’s statement asserts a June response was made. Torrez’s letter does not acknowledge any June response. The reporting from Al Jazeera, the New York Times and The Straits Times all describe the DOJ as publicly denying that it is impeding the inquiry, while quoting Torrez as saying no substantive response has been delivered.

Reopening a probe first halted in 2019

New Mexico first attempted to investigate Epstein’s conduct at Zorro Ranch in 2019, when then-Attorney General Hector Balderas said his office was asked to suspend its work to allow federal prosecutors to pursue the case. The state reopened the investigation in February 2026, after the federal government released millions of files related to the convicted sex offender, some of which concerned the New Mexico property, according to Al Jazeera.

Epstein owned Zorro Ranch from 1993 onward and built a sprawling complex on the site where he hosted guests. Allegations of sex trafficking on the property have never been fully investigated, Al Jazeera reported. The ranch was sold in 2023, complicating physical evidence recovery, Torrez noted in March comments cited by The Straits Times.

Epstein’s background and the federal file release

Epstein was convicted in 2008 in Florida of soliciting a minor for prostitution and served 13 months in jail. He died in 2019 while awaiting federal trial on charges of allegedly masterminding a sex-trafficking ring. His victims are thought to number in the hundreds, according to Al Jazeera.

Pressure to release DOJ files on Epstein intensified during President Donald Trump’s second term. Trump initially opposed release, then backed publication in November and signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which required the DOJ to publish its Epstein records within 30 days with minimal redaction, except to protect victims’ identities. A first batch of documents was published on December 19, but the bulk of millions of files came online only in late January and many were heavily redacted. Some victims’ identities were made public in the release, Al Jazeera reported.

Why it matters

The dispute goes beyond a bureaucratic tug-of-war. Torrez’s letter warned that “witnesses relocate and become unreachable. Memories, already strained by years of trauma, fade further. Physical and documentary evidence degrades, is lost, or is rendered more difficult to authenticate with the passage of time.” If accurate, the practical consequence is that a state-level case into alleged abuse at Zorro Ranch could collapse before charges are filed, even as Congress has explicitly required DOJ transparency on Epstein materials.

The clash also lands inside a politically charged environment. Trump’s ties to Epstein have made the file-release process a target of suspicion, and critics have accused the administration of foot-dragging. Trump’s public position has been that the country should move on from investigating Epstein, The Straits Times reported, though he has signed transparency legislation. The New Mexico complaint effectively places a state Democratic attorney general on one side and a Trump-appointee-led DOJ on the other, sharpening an already partisan fight.

Where the reporting diverges

The three accessible sources align on the basic timeline: a February request, a June 30 letter, public release on July 9, and a DOJ denial that it is obstructing. They diverge on two points. First, the New York Times characterizes the dispute as one over “unredacted records,” while Al Jazeera describes Torrez as having “identified multiple redacted files he requested full access to.” The two phrasings suggest Torrez may be seeking originals of documents already partially produced, not the full file set. Second, the DOJ’s public posture varies by spokesperson: Pels expressed openness to cooperation without claiming a response was sent, while another spokesperson asserted a June response was made. Neither claim has been independently corroborated in the available reporting, and Torrez’s letter does not reference a substantive June reply.

The Reuters wire story referenced in source materials was inaccessible at time of writing, leaving the agency’s framing unverified beyond the headline.

The bigger picture

Zorro Ranch has been described in the available reporting as having “escaped scrutiny for years, even as other parts of Mr. Epstein’s empire were scoured,” in the New York Times’s phrasing. Federal authorities brought the 2019 Southern District of New York case that ended with Epstein’s death; New Mexico’s interest lies in conduct on its own soil that no federal indictment has covered. The 2019 suspension of the state probe, on the grounds that federal prosecutors were taking over, effectively paused accountability for any crimes tied to the ranch for six years.

The release of millions of Epstein files in late 2025 and early 2026 created, in theory, the documentary record needed to revive the state case. Whether the DOJ shares the unredacted underlying records with state investigators is now the operational question. Congress’s Epstein Files Transparency Act was framed around public disclosure with limited redactions; whether it also compels intra-government sharing with state prosecutors is a legal point the available sources do not resolve.

Stakeholders and competing interpretations

Survivors and their advocates have an interest in any prosecution that could result from the Zorro Ranch files. New Mexico’s Department of Justice has an institutional interest in completing an investigation it says was interrupted by federal action in 2019. The DOJ has an interest in preserving whatever redactions it considers necessary, including to protect victims’ identities. Congressional authors of the transparency law may view the impasse as a test of the legislation’s enforcement mechanisms. The administration’s critics frame the delay as evidence of political protectiveness toward figures connected to Epstein, while the DOJ publicly frames its posture as cooperative.

Torrez’s March comments, reported by The Straits Times, already flagged “significant obstacles,” including the years since the alleged crimes, possible deterioration or loss of evidence at the sold ranch, and jurisdictional questions over potential prosecutions. Those structural difficulties exist independently of the records dispute and would complicate any case even with full federal cooperation.

What to watch next

The near-term milestones are concrete. First, whether the DOJ produces the unredacted Zorro Ranch files Torrez says he has repeatedly requested, and whether the agency identifies which June response, if any, it considers substantive. Second, any public response from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who is named as the letter’s recipient and whose nomination was reported separately by Al Jazeera as facing a Senate fight. Third, whether congressional overseers treat the New Mexico complaint as evidence that the Epstein Files Transparency Act is not being honored in practice, which could trigger hearings or compulsion measures.

Analysts will also watch whether other state attorneys general follow Torrez’s lead and seek unredacted materials for their own jurisdictions, since the New Mexico complaint, if credited, suggests federal-to-state sharing may be a broader bottleneck rather than a single-office dispute. This is suggested by the structure of Torrez’s argument, not established fact. What is established is the 130-day timeline Torrez cites and the DOJ’s stated willingness to cooperate — two claims that, on the available reporting, have yet to be reconciled.