Did Biden have access to the Epstein files?
Executive summary
Yes — the federal government possessed extensive Epstein-related files during Joe Biden’s presidency, but saying “Biden had access” simplifies a complex reality: files were held by the Department of Justice and FBI while criminal matters, grand juries and appeals were active, and the White House publicly declined to pressure DOJ to release them [1] [2] [3].
1. What “having access” actually meant in practice
During the Biden administration the DOJ and FBI maintained custody of investigative materials — reported as more than 100,000 pages of evidence including digital records, grand-jury materials and physical evidence — because the Epstein matter remained an active, ongoing law‑enforcement investigation and litigation surrounding related prosecutions was unresolved [1] [2]. Possession by executive-branch investigative agencies is not the same as presidential editorial control over what to publish; legal limits, grand-jury secrecy and victim-privacy rules constrain disclosures even if the White House could, in theory, ask for releases [2] [4].
2. Why the Biden White House said it did not push for release
Senior Biden officials, including Vice President Kamala Harris and other spokespeople, defended the administration’s decision not to compel DOJ to declassify or publish files, arguing DOJ independence and the risk that premature disclosure would jeopardize active investigations and victims’ privacy [3] [5]. Congressional Democrats also sought access and at times were told by DOJ leadership that oversight could compromise prosecutions or ongoing inquiries — a standard line from prosecutors about not releasing files tied to active grand juries or appellate processes [4].
3. The political counter-narrative: accusations and denials
Political opponents framed the lack of a full public release under Biden as concealment, with Trump and allied Republicans accusing the prior administration of hiding a so‑called “client list” or refusing to turn over pages — claims amplified on social media and in political speeches but disputed by fact‑checking outlets and by the DOJ’s stated legal restraints [6] [1] [7]. Trump asserted the Biden administration “did not turn over a single file,” a categorical claim that the reporting context undercuts because agencies retained files and legal processes limited public release [1].
4. What changed after the administration left office
After Trump returned to office, the Justice Department announced a review and then moved to release additional batches of files; Congress later passed legislation ordering wider disclosures and the new administration publicly pushed for further releases — developments that fed the political narrative that files “weren’t released under Biden,” even as the prior administration had cited active investigations and prosecutorial independence as reasons not to force broader publication [1] [3]. Independent fact‑checkers and journalists note that the core investigative work on Epstein began under earlier administrations as well, complicating claims that any single president “made up” or uniquely controlled the files [7].
5. Where the public record is clear — and where it isn’t
It is documented that federal agencies held large numbers of Epstein-related documents during Biden’s term and that the administration refrained from ordering their release, citing DOJ independence and investigative constraints [1] [3]. What remains contested and often misreported is the scope of presidential authority to compel disclosure versus the DOJ’s legal obligation to protect grand-jury secrecy and victim privacy, and whether political calculus — not just legal limits — shaped the White House posture; reporting shows both legal rationale and political consequence, but definitive proof of internal White House deliberations beyond public statements is not available in the cited record [4] [2].