Attorney Katie Phang accused Attorney General Todd Blanche of filing a motion "chock-full of lies" to stall her lawsuit seeking unredacted files on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Phang made the accusation in a broadcast on her YouTube channel on Friday, a day after the Justice Department made a last-minute request to U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan to postpone a deadline in the case.
Sullivan had ordered Blanche to file a certified list of the administrative record, meaning the documents the department relied on to decide what to release and redact, by Oct. 1, according to the motion.
"It's actually pretty illuminating, because it'll reveal, again, the process, the thought process that went into the redactions and the withholds for the files that have been publicly produced thus far," Phang said.
Sullivan's Sept. 16 order also required the department to hand over the full record by Oct. 15, according to a copy Phang showed on air.
"Either way, we have Todd Blanche, the day something is due — the night, more technically, that something is due — he's like, I need more time, judge," Phang said, comparing Blanche to a child asking for more time at the last minute.
The department has sought delays before, asking Sullivan in a July 2 filing to put on hold for 60 days any order to release more records, so the solicitor general could consider an appeal.
In the new motion, the department accused Phang of trying to "circumvent" the Freedom of Information Act, the law the public uses to request government records, by suing under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which it said gives private citizens no right to sue.
"Lie number one. I am not suing pursuant to the Epstein Files Transparency Act," Phang said. "I am suing pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, the APA."
"In fact, if I wasn't suing pursuant to the APA, then why would there even be the requirement for him to produce the certified list in the administrative record? Duh," Phang said.
The motion also said the information Phang seeks is "already available" through FOIA, the statute it said she "ought to use."
Phang said her legal team gave Sullivan a Justice Department reply to a FOIA request in a June 24 filing. The reply said "the [Epstein Files Transparency Act] directed a much broader and less redacted release of the files than would have been made under the FOIA."
"So in other words, Todd Blanche's DOJ was telling somebody who was moving under FOIA for the records, you gotta do it under the [transparency law]," Phang said.
"Well, Todd, which one is it?" Phang asked.
In Thursday's motion, the department argued that preparing the record would waste the court's time and "taxpayer resources" because the case "is likely to be dismissed."
"Get the f— out of here," Phang said. "Are you kidding me? You think it's a good use of taxpayers' time and money to be able to do illegal redactions and withholds that are now forcing me to have to go and sue?"
The motion also said there are "no material facts in dispute," meaning the two sides agree on what happened and only legal questions remain.
"The entire lawsuit is premised on facts in dispute," Phang said. "I say that they have illegally withheld records, that they've illegally redacted records. He says no, that that's not the case."
Phang said her lawyers' reaction to the delay request was "well, hell no."
In a statement the department included in its motion, the lawyers said the request "should be denied on its face" because a local court rule requires the certified list to be filed at the same time as any motion that could end the case.
The department filed that kind of motion the same day, asking Sullivan in a separate filing to rule in its favor based only on the court papers filed so far.
"Just redact the victims' information. Turn over the rest of it. Who are you protecting?" Phang said.
