Numerous women who say they were victimized by Jeffrey Epstein's sex-trafficking operation appeared in a Super Bowl ad Sunday, demanding Attorney General Pam Bondi release the full trove of case files — a direct, nationally televised challenge to a Department of Justice that has released only half of what it holds.
The ad, produced by World Without Exploitation, featured the women standing together on camera with a simple message directed at the nation's top law enforcement officer.
"After years of being kept apart, we're standing together. Because this girl deserves the truth."
The spot closed with on-screen text: "Tell Attorney General Pam Bondi it's time for the truth."
The DOJ has released more than 3 million pages from Epstein's case files, Fox News reported. That sounds like a lot — until you learn the department started with more than 6 million. A major portion remains withheld, with the DOJ citing concerns that some information could identify alleged victims or fall under legal privileges.
President Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act in November 2025. The law was supposed to force sunlight into one of the darkest scandals in modern American life. Bipartisan support carried it across the finish line. What followed has frustrated lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., one of the legislation's top supporters, has contended the DOJ failed to comply with the transparency law. He and other lawmakers said they planned to visit the DOJ on Monday to review undisclosed files firsthand. That a sitting congressman feels the need to physically show up at the Justice Department to see documents a law already compels the department to release tells you everything about how Washington treats transparency mandates — as suggestions, not obligations.
The DOJ has pushed back, calling its review "very comprehensive" and stating it did not hide any information for the purpose of protecting President Donald Trump or other wealthy and politically connected people, including former President Bill Clinton. Both men were once friends of Epstein's but were never accused of crimes associated with him. The department also said it has moved swiftly to correct redaction mistakes brought to its attention.
Correcting mistakes after they're caught is not the same as getting it right the first time.
It took about five minutes for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to turn the ad into a campaign clip. He shared the video on X, calling it "the most important ad" of the day, and added:
"You don't 'move on' from the largest sex trafficking ring in the world. You expose it. #StandWithSurvivors"
Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., who has positioned himself as the lead Democrat on Epstein matters in the House, shared a similar message.
Here's what's worth noticing: Democrats controlled the White House and the Justice Department for four years before Trump signed this transparency act. They had every tool available to declassify, release, and expose these files. They didn't. The Epstein Files Transparency Act exists because a Republican president signed it into law.
Now Schumer and Garcia rush to social media to demand the very transparency their party declined to deliver when it held the keys. The concern is real. The timing is convenient. These two things can coexist — and conservatives should note both without pretending the left's sudden urgency isn't partly theatrical.
World Without Exploitation is a project of the Tides Center, a progressive nonprofit. That doesn't invalidate the women who appeared in it — their pain is not a talking point. But it does mean the organizational infrastructure behind the ad comes from the institutional left, and the decision to air it during the Super Bowl was as much a political play as a moral appeal. Millions of dollars in airtime don't get purchased by accident. Someone decided Bondi's name — not the DOJ's institutional inertia, not the career officials managing redactions — should be the face of the delay.
That framing matters. The transparency law is new. The bureaucratic machinery resisting full disclosure is old. Personalizing the bottleneck to one political appointee is a choice, and it's a choice that serves Democratic messaging heading into a midterm cycle.
More than 3 million pages are out. Millions more are not. The DOJ says legal privileges and victim protection justify the holdback. Maybe some of that is legitimate. Protecting the identities of trafficking victims is a serious concern that reasonable people should support.
But "legal privileges" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that explanation. The American public has watched for years as the Epstein saga revealed a network of powerful people who moved freely through elite circles — finance, politics, academia — while the justice system produced exactly one conviction before Epstein died in federal custody. Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted. Beyond that, accountability has been remarkably scarce for a scandal of this magnitude.
The frustration that drove Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna to hold a joint press conference on the transparency act outside the Capitol in November 2025 — a Republican and a progressive standing side by side — reflects something rare in Washington: genuine bipartisan agreement that the public deserves answers. When Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna agree, the establishment should pay attention.
The women in that ad aren't asking for a partisan outcome. They're asking for the documents. The DOJ has 3 million more pages it hasn't released. Every day those pages stay locked in a filing cabinet, the people they might implicate sleep a little easier.