NEW: Federal Judge Sides With DOJ, Trump Administration In Key Ruling

A federal judge on Wednesday shut down an effort by two members of Congress to force broader disclosure of Jeffrey Epstein records, ruling he lacks the authority to appoint an outside watchdog to oversee the Justice Department’s compliance with a transparency law.

In a seven-page decision, U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer rejected a request from Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., to insert themselves into the closed criminal case of convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell.

The lawmakers sought to participate as amici curiae, or friends of the court, and asked Engelmayer to appoint a special master to supervise the release of Epstein-related files under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Khanna and Massie argued that without independent oversight, the Justice Department would fail to produce all records required by the law.

Engelmayer said he could not grant the request because the congressmen are not parties to the Maxwell case, which concluded with her December 2021 conviction and 20-year prison sentence for recruiting girls for Epstein.

“The only parties to the case are Maxwell and the United States, the latter represented, as is always the case, by DOJ,” Engelmayer wrote. “The Indictment against Maxwell brought charges under six federal criminal statutes. Those were not brought under the EFTA, which did not exist at the time and is not a criminal statute. And this case is now effectively closed.”

Fox News Digital reached out to the Justice Department for comment.

“We appreciate the judge’s thoughtful consideration of our letter and we remain determined to force the DOJ to follow our law using other avenues available to us and the survivors,” Massie said in a statement.

Khanna echoed that message, saying the push for disclosure is not over.

“We appreciate Judge Engelmayer’s timely response and attention to our request, and we respect his decision,” Khanna said. “He said that we raised ‘legitimate concerns’ about whether DOJ is complying with the law. We will continue to use every legal option to ensure the files are released and the survivors see justice.”

Khanna and Massie were the driving forces behind the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law last year. The measure required the Justice Department to release all evidence gathered during decades of Epstein investigations by Dec. 19.

Weeks after that deadline passed, only a small portion of the material has been made public, fueling bipartisan frustration and renewed scrutiny of the department.

The Justice Department has said the slow rollout is due to the need to redact information to protect abuse victims.

“We are informing the Court of serious misconduct by the Department of Justice that requires a remedy, one we believe this Court has the authority to provide, and which victims themselves have requested,” Khanna said previously in a statement to The Associated Press.

“Our purpose is to ensure that DOJ complies with its representations to the Court and with its legal obligations under our law,” he added.

In a letter to the court, Khanna and Massie said the release of roughly 12,000 documents out of more than 2 million under review amounted to a “flagrant violation” of the statute.

“Put simply, the DOJ cannot be trusted with making mandatory disclosures under the Act,” they wrote.

Engelmayer acknowledged the lawmakers’ concerns but said the court’s role is limited.

“The Representatives do not seek to opine on any live issue before the Court,” he wrote. “The appointment of a neutral to supervise DOJ’s compliance with the EFTA is far afield from any matter pending before the Court. It is thus not a permitted form of amicus participation.”

Download the FREE Trending Politics App to get the latest news FIRST >>