Epstein Files: Voted NO in July, YES in November—But September Letter Never Mentioned the Change

September 4, 2025 Government Transparency

Epstein Files: Voted NO in July, YES in November—But September Letter Never Mentioned the Change

The Timeline

Result: Langworthy voted NO on immediate release in July, then voted YES on a nearly identical bill (H.R.4405) in November—127 days later. Files are now being released (though DOJ missed the deadline), but Langworthy’s September letter to constituents never mentioned he would later vote YES.

The Exchange

Constituent’s Message — August 2025

Constituent contacted Rep. Langworthy’s office to express concerns about the Jeffrey Epstein case and transparency regarding related documents.

→

Langworthy’s Response — September 4, 2025

“I want to begin by stating that Jeffrey Epstein was a disgusting individual, and I support full transparency and accountability regarding the Epstein files. I have never opposed the release of the documents since Epstein’s 2019 suicide…”
“Unfortunately, Democrat members of the House Rules Committee chose to [politicize this] and on July 14, 2025, introduced a last-minute amendment related to the Epstein files… The Democrats’ amendment did not meet this standard and, more importantly, would not have led to the release of a single classified document.”
“That’s why I am an original cosponsor of H.Res.589… Presently, H.Res.589 awaits a vote on the House Floor for further consideration.”

Fact-Check: His Claims vs. The Record

Langworthy’s Claim (Sept 4)	The Record
“I have never opposed the release”	Voted NO on July 14 amendment to release files
Democratic amendment was a “political stunt”	Amendment was 47 words directing publication with victim protections
H.Res.589 is the real solution	H.Res.589 never received floor vote; different bill (H.R.4405) passed instead
Democratic amendment “would not have led to release”	Nearly identical bill (H.R.4405) passed 427-1 and was signed into law Nov 19

The Core Contradiction

September 4 letter says: “I have never opposed the release of the documents”

July 14 vote: NO on amendment to release files

November 18 vote: YES on nearly identical bill (H.R.4405) - passed 427-1

The contradiction: Langworthy’s September letter defended his NO vote and never mentioned he would vote YES on an almost identical bill just 10 weeks later. If the July amendment was truly a “political stunt” that “would not have led to release,” why did he vote YES on H.R.4405 in November?

What Actually Happened on July 14, 2025

From the Epstein Files fact-check:

Democrats proposed a simple, 47-word amendment: ‘The Committee on the Judiciary is directed to publish online any records, documents, or communications in its possession related to the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein (including any related to co-conspirators), ensuring appropriate redactions to protect victim identities.’
Langworthy voted NO.
Three days later, he cosponsored H.Res.589, a nearly identical resolution — but one that would require committee review before release, with no deadline specified.

The key difference:

Democratic amendment: Direct publication with victim protections
H.Res.589: Committee review process, no timeline, no guarantee of release

This Is a Form Letter

Tracking ID: [K1KJYG-D2RK5]

This email contains identical hidden HTML tracking code found in all Langworthy office responses:

<span style="color: white; margin-left: -10000px; position:absolute;
left: -9999999px; opacity: 0; visibility: hidden; display: none !important;">
</span>

This confirms this is a templated, automated response rather than a personalized reply.

What Actually Happened: The Full Timeline

July 14, 2025: Democrats propose amendment to release Epstein files

Langworthy votes NO

September 4, 2025: Langworthy sends form letter to constituent

Defends NO vote as procedural
Says amendment “would not have led to release”
Promotes H.Res.589 as alternative

November 18, 2025: H.R.4405 (Epstein Files Transparency Act) passes House

Vote: 427-1 (only Rep. Clay Higgins voted NO)
Langworthy votes YES
Bill is nearly identical to July amendment he voted against

November 19, 2025: Trump signs H.R.4405 into law

December 19, 2025: DOJ begins releasing files

Partial release violates deadline set by law
Receives bipartisan criticism

Questions This Raises

If the July amendment was a “political stunt” that “would not have led to release,” why did Langworthy vote YES on H.R.4405—a nearly identical bill—just 4 months later?
Why did his September letter to constituents defend the NO vote without mentioning he would soon vote YES on similar legislation?
If he truly “never opposed the release,” why vote NO in July when he voted YES in November?
Was the difference between July and November the political optics, or was there a substantive policy change?
Files are now being released under H.R.4405. Would they have been released sooner if he’d voted YES in July?

Documents & Sources

Langworthy’s Response Letter (September 4, 2025) - Page 3 of PDF

Legislative Sources:

Published: December 29, 2025 Submitted by: Anonymous Constituent

Personal information has been redacted to protect constituent privacy. All information verified through email headers, timestamps, House Rules Committee records, Congress.gov, and legislative records.