JUST IN: Minnesota Governor Tim Walz Blasts Attorney General Pam Bondi, Tells DOJ to “Release the Epstein Files”

Walz Rejects Federal Demands, Accuses Justice Department of Dodging Accountability

MINNEAPOLIS — Minnesota Governor Tim Walz delivered a blistering public response to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi on Sunday, forcefully rejecting federal demands directed at his administration and redirecting attention to what he called a far more urgent and unresolved national issue: the long-delayed release of the Jeffrey Epstein files.

“There’s 2 million documents in the Epstein files we’re still waiting on,” Walz said during a press briefing. “Go ahead and work on those.”

The remark immediately ignited national attention, crystallizing growing frustration among state leaders, transparency advocates, and the public over the Department of Justice’s continued failure to release records mandated under the 2025 Epstein Files Transparency Act.

A Federal Letter Sparks a Political Firestorm

The confrontation began with a sharply worded letter sent Saturday by Attorney General Bondi to Governor Walz, at a moment of heightened tension in Minnesota following the controversial fatal shooting of a local resident by a federal immigration agent.

In the letter, Bondi laid out several demands, calling on Minnesota officials to:

• Provide data from state welfare programs for federal investigations

• End what she described as Minnesota’s “sanctuary policies”

• Grant federal access to the state’s voter registration records

The Department of Justice framed the requests as necessary measures to “restore the rule of law” and strengthen cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Walz’s response made clear he saw the letter not as a serious law enforcement request, but as a politically motivated escalation.

Walz: ‘This Is Not About Public Safety’

At Sunday’s briefing, Walz dismissed the DOJ’s demands as disconnected from the realities facing Minnesotans and accused the federal government of misplacing its priorities.

He emphasized that Minnesota already cooperates with federal authorities where legally required, including turning over undocumented individuals in custody when mandated by law. Claims that state policies have fueled lawlessness, Walz said, are misleading.

“This is not serious,” he said, signaling that the letter was less about public safety and more about political posturing.

But it was Walz’s Epstein comment that cut through the noise — and landed squarely on the Department of Justice’s most sensitive unresolved controversy.

The Epstein Files: A National Flashpoint

Under the Epstein Files Transparency Act of 2025, the Department of Justice is legally required to release millions of documents related to convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, including records tied to investigations, financial networks, and potential associates.

Despite the law, critics say disclosure has stalled, with DOJ officials citing ongoing reviews and redactions. Transparency advocates argue the delays are unjustified and eroding public trust.

Walz’s remarks echoed a broader national sentiment: that federal authorities appear far more aggressive in pressuring states than in confronting their own accountability failures.

By publicly calling out the Epstein files during a dispute over immigration enforcement, Walz reframed the conflict — shifting scrutiny away from Minnesota and directly onto the Justice Department itself.

A State Pushing Back Against Federal Pressure

The exchange comes amid escalating protests across Minnesota, particularly in Minneapolis, following several controversial encounters involving federal agents and civilians. Multiple fatal incidents have intensified criticism of federal enforcement tactics and sparked calls for restraint.

Walz has repeatedly urged a reassessment of federal operations in the state, including the withdrawal of certain federal personnel. He has argued that aggressive tactics are inflaming tensions rather than improving public safety.

According to reports, Minnesota officials maintain that cooperation with federal agencies continues within the boundaries of state law — but that blanket access to sensitive data, including voter rolls and welfare records, crosses a line.

Federal-State Tensions Head Into Election Season

The standoff between Walz and Bondi highlights a broader national struggle over federal authority, state sovereignty, data privacy, and immigration enforcement, all unfolding as the country heads toward the 2026 election cycle.

For the Trump-aligned Justice Department, the pressure campaign against Minnesota fits into a wider push to assert federal dominance over states that resist hardline immigration policies.

For Walz, the moment has become an opportunity to draw a stark contrast: states being lectured on “law and order” by a federal government unwilling to fully disclose information in one of the most notorious criminal scandals in modern history.

A Line Drawn in Public

Walz’s message was unmistakable. Minnesota will not be intimidated by federal letters, and it will not accept lectures about legality from an administration still sitting on millions of Epstein-related documents.

The political risk is real. But so is the calculation.

By invoking Epstein, Walz tapped into bipartisan outrage, public distrust, and a growing demand for transparency that cuts across party lines. It transformed a bureaucratic dispute into a national accountability moment — and put the Justice Department on the defensive.

Why This Moment Matters

This clash is about more than immigration policy or intergovernmental disputes. It reflects a deeper question now playing out across the country: Who is actually accountable, and to whom?

As Walz made clear, states are increasingly unwilling to accept federal pressure while unanswered questions about power, secrecy, and justice remain unresolved at the highest levels.

And with two million Epstein documents still unseen, the issue is not going away.