Pressure is building on Attorney General Pam Bondi over the delayed release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. A former federal prosecutor is warning that the stakes may be more serious than just political fallout.
Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance has raised the possibility that Congress could use a rarely mentioned enforcement tool, inherent contempt, to ensure compliance if the Justice Department keeps “slow-walking” the release. In her Substack, Vance argued that inherent contempt is not just a symbolic threat; it’s a real option lawmakers can use when they think an administration is ignoring an existing law.
Vance’s warning targets Bondi, a former Florida attorney general and lobbyist who now leads the Justice Department. The twist, as Vance notes, is that the legal obligation comes from a law signed by Donald Trump, the very president Bondi supports.
Inherent contempt, Vance explained, could result in a daily financial penalty that adds up quickly. “Bondi could be fined $5,000 a day, each day, for as long as the DOJ fails to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Action,” Vance wrote. “Whether Bondi would respond is uncertain, perhaps even unlikely, but inherent contempt would be a modest first step toward getting the administration to comply with the law and release the files.”
Vance’s longer-term warning is more personal and potentially more harmful. She suggested that ongoing resistance could lead Bondi to face professional consequences that linger long after any administration is gone.
Vance pointed to Rudy Giuliani, the former Trump lawyer whose legal career effectively fell apart after losing his law license, as a cautionary example of what can happen when lawyers are seen as crossing ethical lines while serving a political cause. The comparison is direct, aimed not at cable news but at state bar oversight and professional discipline.
Vance wrote that if Bondi does not comply with congressional demands, she could face consequences beyond fines and headlines. At a minimum, the conflict could escalate into a broader institutional fight over whether the attorney general is ignoring lawful requirements. At most, Vance suggested that the situation could lead to harsher actions from lawmakers.
If Bondi continues to resist, Vance argued there might be enough support to consider impeachment, positioning it as one of the rare moments when Republicans could break away from the Trump administration on an issue related to Epstein. In Vance’s view, the political dynamics aren’t the only factor Bondi should consider.
“At the end of the day, Bondi has a law license to worry about,” Vance wrote. “The cautionary tale of state bars that disbarred lawyers like Rudy Giuliani, who went too far from their ethical obligations as lawyers in service of Trump during his first term should weigh heavily on anyone who hopes for a future after Trump.”
Vance also emphasized that inherent contempt is not a new concept created for this situation. She noted it has been in use since 1935 and argued that Congress should stop treating it like a relic that can’t be used. “It may be that Congress should avoid letting the perfect get in the way of a good solution and revisit this practical option for what seems to be an impossible problem. Epstein’s survivors deserve justice.”
Bondi is facing more potential legal issues for potentially breaking the law. The longer the delay continues, the more it becomes an issue that follows her beyond Washington.
