Source release

House Oversight Committee — Epstein Estate Records (Nov 2025)

Source U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Released November 12, 2025 69,179 documents

Documents released by the U.S. House Committee on Oversight from the Epstein estate (November 2025). Public records, OCR-processed for full-text and semantic search.

View the official release

Documents in this release

69,179 total

Judge Aldrich Immediately Expressed Skepticism About The Reach Of My Argument

document Judge Aldrich immediately expressed skepticism about the reach of my argument

” but I argued that there was no real difference between possession and exhibition

document I acknowledged that “the Supreme Court ruled only on [home] possession in the Stanley case

I Submit That It’s Indistinguishable Whether A Person Makes A Private

document I submit that it’s indistinguishable whether a person makes a private

I was concerned that he would remember the incident we had when I turned down his invitation to spea

document When I learned that Judge Aldrich would preside over the panel selected to hear the I Am Curious Yellow case

In Those Days

document In those days

I Decided On A Bold Challenge To The Traditional Power Of The Government To Censor Obscene Material—Indeed To Censor Any “Offensive” Material Shown Only To People Who Aren’t Offended By It. Instead Of Arguing That The Film Itself Was Not Obscene

document I decided on a bold challenge to the traditional power of the government to censor obscene material—indeed to censor any “offensive” material shown only to people who aren’t offended by it. Instead of arguing that the film itself was not obscene

Although The List Was Never Officially Promulgated By The Federal Communications Commission

document Although the list was never officially promulgated by the Federal Communications Commission

You May Remember That In The 1970S

document You may remember that in the 1970s

show or publish often carries a heavy price tag. As kids

document Freedom of speech is not free. The right to say

I concluded with the following plea: “Let us hear no more nonsensical analogies to shouting fire in

document In a 1989 article I wrote criticizing the Holmes Analogy

In The Coming Pages I Will Describe A Series Of Pornography Cases I Have Litigated. In Several Of Them

document In the coming pages I will describe a series of pornography cases I have litigated. In several of them

offering the patrons a leaflet advising them that in his opinion the theater was a fire hazard

document A closer analogy to the facts of the Schenck case might have been provided by a person’s standing outside a theater

“the First Amendment recognizes no such thing as a ‘false’ idea.” Nor does it recognize false opinio

document to the draft. As the Supreme Court has repeatedly stated

Justice Holmes Upheld The Convictions

document Justice Holmes upheld the convictions

“The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a

document done.” And to illustrate that truism he went on to say

in saying all that was said in the circular

document Holmes also acknowledged that “in many places and in ordinary times the defendants

The Case That Gave Rise To The “Fire!” In A Crowded Theater Analogy— Schenck V. United States— Involved The Prosecution Of Charles Schenck

document The case that gave rise to the “Fire!”-in-a-crowded-theater analogy— Schenck v. United States— involved the prosecution of Charles Schenck

In The Pages To Follow

document In the pages to follow

as with obscenity which may offend and also cause violence against women

document These alleged harms sometimes overlap

4. Disclosure Of Information That May Harm The Nation Or Individuals. This Includes Military And Diplomatic Secrets

document 4. Disclosure of information that may harm the nation or individuals. This includes military and diplomatic secrets