One of the most important cases of our current time is the discourse surrounding the Epstein files. Jeffrey Epstein, an American financier, was a convicted sex offender who ran a sex trafficking ring involving underage girls. The timeline of the Epstein case dates back to 2005, when Florida police investigated reports of molestation at his mansion. Numerous girls later testified that Epstein hired them for sexual massages at his homes, most notably in the U.S. Virgin Islands, also known as “Epstein Island.” 

The Epstein files highlight the flaws within the democratic system that are failing to hold elites accountable. Bermeo suggests democratic erosion often develops gradually through small, repeated actions. Under the Trump administration, a reversal of government transparency and the use of executive powers have prevented the full release of the ‘Epstein files,’ an issue central to public interest and victims seeking justice. 

The government’s mishandling and lack of transparency show elites using power to deny accountability, leading to democratic erosion from within. We see Bermeo’s practice of democratic erosion date back to 2008, when Jeffrey Epstein pleaded guilty to state charges. He was sentenced to 18 months in jail. Under a secret arrangement, by Alex Acosta, the U.S. attorney’s office agreed not to prosecute Epstein for federal crimes. Serving his sentence in a work-release program, he was later released in 2009. It wasn’t until 2021 that the arrangement was found to have been kept secret from Epstein’s victims, violating the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA). The reopening of the case back in 2018 was due to the public outrage, and when Miami revisited the handling of the case, leading to his arrest in New York and later suicide a few months later in his jail cell. 

With the media and public traction the Epstein case was gaining during this time, it became a key player in Trump’s MAGA movement back in 2024, suggesting during his presidential campaign that he’d seek to release details of the Epstein files. Pam Bondi, a republican attorney, would lead the investigation into the Epstein case. Yet when he took office in 2025, this position changed. With the supposed involvement of many elites, we have seen the discourse around the DOJ’s release statement of a supposed “Epstein list” which withheld thousands of names involved in having a close connection to Epstein’s island. A month after the inauguration, Bondi told Fox News the client list was “on my desk right now to review.” Yet a few months later, the Justice Department claimed Epstein didn’t maintain a “client list,” and wouldn’t make any more files related to his sex trafficking investigation public.  

This inconsistency from the government creates a transparency gap and begins to undermine vertical accountability, by which citizens can hold their leaders responsible. Yet in July 2025, when the Wall Street Journal published a sexually suggestive letter that bore Trump’s name and was included in a 2003 album for Epstein’s 50th birthday. Trump denied the letter and filed a $10 billion lawsuit against them. In this instance, Trump’s lawsuit is a lack of forbearance, the restraint from maximizing legal power. While he has the “legal right”, his lawsuit against a news outlet is a clear method of stealth authoritarianism, which Ozan Varol discusses, exerting active control over media outlets through the use of legal mechanisms that appear democratic as a way to maintain his image. This raises the question of whose interests are truly being protected.

It wasn’t until intense pressure from MAGA supporters that his administration, with Congress, passed the “Epstein Files Transparency Act” in late 2025. This mandated the DOJ to release all documents regarding Epstein, publishing over 3 million additional pages. However, as the public saw heavy redactions, it suggested a reinforcement of executive power rather than real transparency that the public called for. This asymmetrical transparency has prompted the erosion of horizontal accountability, which is discussed by O’Donnell, referring to states’ institutions’ ability to check one another, essential in preventing abuses of power. An investigation by NPR later found that the DOJ, under the Trump administration, withheld dozens of pages related to sexual abuse accusations. 

Additionally, we are seeing the framing of the Epstein case against partisans in our highly polarized state. The Epstein files have fallen into the “us vs. them” narrative when it comes to affective polarization. Affective polarization is described as partisans’ extreme dislike for the opposing party, reflected through social behavior. Trump himself has retweeted groundless allegations, implicating people on the left, having involvement, and hurting his administration, from his “AMAZING Victories.” Levitsky and Ziblatt argue that the main factor in democracy is Mutual toleration, where there must be a collective agreement that, as long as they play by constitutional rules, they must accept their opponents as legitimate. But once you treat your opponents as “enemies,” you enable the justification of authoritarianism. We see the Epstein files are being used as a partisan weapon rather than for justice.

Lack of transparency has fueled theories regarding the DOJ and FBI’s role in scrubbing files. While Trump’s name and images appear in released documents, he continues denying any involvement, as they broke off contact years ago. Trump now dismisses the case as “pretty boring,” ignoring the thousands of survivors. A February 2026 review found the DOJ failed to redact the names of 43 out of 47 victims in a sample, exposing their identities while keeping hundreds of elites protected. We see a lack of prioritization from the DOJ in protecting those who were actually harmed.

The FBI and DOJ are making their flaws apparent, failing to uphold the rule of law. If these systems are easily manipulated by elites within the government, such as the President, we are breaking the very promise that democracy upholds, working against the full transparency citizens deserve. As news coverage moves on, the Epstein files are being swept under the rug. This pattern of protecting elites over victims signals democratic erosion, with hundreds of redacted names yet to be released.