What court filings detail Katie Johnson's allegations against Donald Trump and where can they be accessed?

1. What filings formally contain Katie Johnson’s allegations — and where they live

The primary documents that set out Katie Johnson’s allegations are the initial Complaint and related docket entries in the federal case Katie Johnson v. Donald J. Trump, case number 5:16‑cv‑00797, filed in the Central District of California; those filings and subsequent entries are compiled on public docket pages such as CourtListener’s case file ^[1]. CourtListener’s docket view and its FJC IDB mirror list the Complaint, Notices, requests (for example, to proceed in forma pauperis) and other case filings that constituted the public record for this litigation ^{[1] [4]}.

2. How to access the filings online — free aggregator links

Researchers can read the docket and linked filings via CourtListener’s case page, which shows the Complaint and supporting docket entries and was updated through at least August 2025 ^[1]. An archived copy of the official PACER docket is also available through an Internet Archive page that reproduces the court’s docket listing for the case ^[2]. Law360 maintains a commercial docket tracking entry that summarizes filings and updates for this case number, offering another route for tracking activity if you have access ^[3].

3. What you will find in those docket listings

The docket listings enumerate core filings: the Complaint naming Jeffrey Epstein and Donald J. Trump, notices of case assignment to Judge Dolly M. Gee and referral to Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson, a request to proceed in forma pauperis and other civil‑procedure filings ^[1]. The Complaint is the initial pleading that contains the plaintiff’s allegations; subsequent docket entries reflect administrative steps and any motions, notices or case management events ^[1].

4. Commercial services vs. public archives — tradeoffs

CourtListener and the Internet Archive page provide free public access to docket entries and frequently link to PDFs when available, and CourtListener’s FJC IDB extract offers an additional research interface ^{[1] [4] [2]}. Law360’s entry gives professionally curated docket activity and alerts but sits behind a paywall and may present the case in the context of broader legal‑industry analysis ^[3]. The choice between free archives and paid services depends on whether you need raw filings (free sources suffice) or curated, analyst‑driven updates (Law360).

5. What the reporting and commentary add — and what they don’t

Independent writeups and commentary, including long‑form pieces cataloguing the case and placing it in the Epstein‑related milieu, provide context and interpretation but are not substitutes for the court filings themselves ^[5]. Some commentary asserts the case’s broader political and evidentiary implications; available sources note ongoing public interest tied to releases of Epstein‑related material but do not substitute for the actual complaint or docket ^[5].

6. Limits of the available sources and outstanding questions

The provided sources document where the filings are posted and list the docket entries, but they do not supply the full text of every filing within these search results themselves — you must follow the CourtListener or archived docket links to read the Complaint and supporting documents ^{[1] [2]}. Available sources do not mention post‑2016 developments in the case beyond docket availability and archival updates; assertions about later legal actions or revived filings are not present in these sources ^{[1] [2] [4]}.

7. Practical next steps for the reader who wants the filings

Go to the CourtListener case page for Katie Johnson v. Donald J. Trump to view the docket and linked filings ^[1]. If a PDF or complete docket snapshot is needed, consult the Internet Archive reproduction of the PACER docket ^[2]. For ongoing tracking or editorial summary, Law360 provides continuous docket activity updates, subject to subscription ^[3].