House of Representatives whom he described as Epstein “co-conspirators” and calling for investigations and possible prosecutions.
The dramatic move comes as Massie pushes Congress to take up the Epstein Files Transparency Act II, legislation designed to strengthen access to Epstein-related government records and provide additional legal avenues to challenge the U.S. Department of Justice over documents that remain withheld or heavily redacted.
Massie Names 14 People on House Floor
During his House floor remarks on August 31, Massie read the names of 14 people whom he said should face investigation over alleged connections to Epstein’s activities.
The list included prominent business figures, entertainers and other well-known individuals. Massie argued that publicly naming them could increase pressure on the Justice Department to investigate.
It is extremely important, however, to distinguish Massie’s allegations from established criminal guilt. Being associated with Epstein, appearing in records, or being publicly named by a member of Congress does not itself establish that a person committed a crime. Current reporting indicates that the living individuals Massie named have not been charged in connection with Epstein.
What Is the Epstein Files Transparency Act II?
Massie’s latest effort centers on H.R. 9694, the Epstein Files Transparency Act II, which was introduced in July 2026.
According to the official congressional text, the legislation would expand enforcement mechanisms connected with the original Epstein Files Transparency Act. Massie’s congressional office says it would allow state attorneys general, certain state officials, Epstein victims and members of Congress to challenge the U.S. Attorney General in court over alleged failures to disclose required Epstein-related records.
The proposal would also give victims greater ability to obtain unredacted records concerning themselves and would facilitate access to relevant federal records for state and local prosecutors conducting investigations.
Massie has launched a discharge petition to try to force the legislation onto the House floor. Such a petition generally requires 218 House signatures to succeed.
Where Does President Donald Trump Fit Into the Story?
A viral graphic circulating online asks whether people support Massie publishing names from the Epstein files “even if that might mean the imprisonment” of President Donald Trump.
That wording should not be treated as an established news fact.
The verified story is that Massie is demanding additional disclosure of Epstein-related material and investigations of people he believes deserve scrutiny. The available evidence supporting this report does not establish that Massie’s latest action means Trump will be imprisoned.
In fact, Trump signed the original Epstein Files Transparency Act into law in November 2025. Massie now argues that the Justice Department has not fully complied with its disclosure requirements, an allegation that forms the basis of his push for the second transparency bill.
Therefore, headlines claiming that Massie is releasing the Epstein files specifically to send Trump to prison go beyond what has currently been established.
Massie Pressures Justice Department
Massie says millions of Epstein-related records remain unavailable despite the earlier transparency legislation.
His congressional office alleges that more than three million files remain withheld and that some released records contain excessive redactions. The new legislation is intended to provide additional ways for victims and government officials to challenge those decisions.
Massie’s latest campaign also demonstrates that the Epstein controversy continues to cross traditional political lines. His legislation has received support from Democratic lawmakers including Rep. Ro Khanna and Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández.
A Story That Continues to Develop
The renewed congressional fight ensures that the Epstein files will remain a significant issue in Washington.
Massie’s demand is straightforward: release more information, investigate credible evidence of criminal conduct, and allow prosecutors and victims greater access to relevant government records.
At the same time, responsible reporting requires a distinction between appearing in Epstein-related documents, being accused of wrongdoing, being investigated, being charged and being convicted. Those are not the same thing.
As Congress considers Massie’s latest proposal and lawmakers continue debating the release of additional records, further disclosures could emerge.
ENS NEWS will continue to follow developments surrounding the Epstein files, congressional investigations and the Epstein Files Transparency Act II.