The Department of Justice quietly published a policy change last month granting the attorney general personal authority to approve prison transfers — a move three House Democrats allege is an attempt to retroactively legitimise the controversial transfer of convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to a facility that generally bars sex offenders. The policy change, Democrats argue, traces a straight line back to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.
The new Bureau of Prisons policy, first reported by MS Now and not previously disclosed, grants the attorney general authority to “designate or redesignate the place of a prisoner’s imprisonment” — authority that previously rested solely with the Bureau of Prisons under a detailed classification process spanning more than 100 pages of policy guidance.
Former federal prosecutor Paul Butler called the change significant, telling MS Now the DOJ had “basically thrown all of that out of the window” and given the attorney general personal discretion in place of trained BOP professionals — with no public explanation for why.
Rep. Deborah Ross (D-NC), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, said the “clear implication” is that the DOJ violated its own rules when it moved Maxwell in August 2025. “I don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out what they’re doing,” Ross said.
She, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD), and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) — author of the Epstein Files Transparency Act — sent a letter to Bureau of Prisons Director William Marshall demanding a full accounting of the transfer, all supporting documentation, and a transcript of Maxwell’s DOJ interview. Ross said that she hopes the issue surfaces during Blanche’s upcoming Senate confirmation hearing.
The transfer and what preceded it
Maxwell is serving a 20-year sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking operation. On July 24 and 25, 2025, then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche conducted a closed-door two-day interview with Maxwell — an unusual arrangement, since such meetings are ordinarily handled by FBI agents or local US attorneys, not the deputy attorney general. Roughly one week later, Maxwell transferred from a low-security federal prison in Tallahassee, Florida, to Federal Prison Camp Bryan in Texas, a minimum-security facility.
Read: Ghislaine Maxwell Transferred to Minimum-Security Prison After Justice Department Interview
The transfer required the Bureau of Prisons to issue an unprecedented waiver due to Maxwell’s classification as a violent offender — sex offenders are generally ineligible for minimum-security camps under standard BOP policy. The waiver’s existence directly contradicts AG Pam Bondi’s February testimony that the transfer involved no change in security level.
The purpose of that interview, as reported by the New York Times, was not straightforwardly about accountability. According to Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan’s book Regime Change, Blanche proposed the Maxwell interview as part of a White House strategy designed to project transparency on the Epstein files while producing nothing of substance. Maxwell’s conduct in the interview appeared to confirm the outcome — she reportedly described Trump as a “gentleman” and was transferred to a better facility shortly after.
Read: New Book Reveals White House Held Situation Room Meetings Over Epstein Files—With One Goal: Spin
Former prisonmate Jen Shah — a Real Housewives of Salt Lake City alumna, herself convicted of fraud — told People magazine that Maxwell has received special privileges unavailable to other inmates at Federal Prison Camp Bryan and has expressed no remorse for her crimes. Ross told MS Now that Epstein survivors she had spoken with described Maxwell’s preferential treatment as re-traumatising.
The transfer came as Maxwell was mounting parallel legal efforts. Maxwell filed a Supreme Court brief in July 2025 claiming a 2007 non-prosecution agreement should have shielded her from conviction, and has separately sought clemency from Trump.
The accountability gap
When AG Pam Bondi appeared before the House Judiciary Committee in February, she testified she learned of the transfer after the fact and played no role in approving it, characterising the move as a shift between facilities of the same security level. Democrats disagree. A low-security prison and a minimum-security camp are not the same thing under Bureau of Prisons rules — and sex offenders are generally barred from the latter.
Lawmakers note that the Epstein Library — the DOJ’s online transparency repository — holds no records documenting the authorisation of Maxwell’s transfer, aside from an August 2025 FBI memo summarising press coverage.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act requires disclosure of all government documents related to Maxwell without limiting the scope to records from her original criminal case, and Democrats argue transfer authorization records fall squarely within that mandate.
The May 2026 policy change formally authorises what Bondi said no one at the DOJ did — giving the attorney general direct authority over prison placements. Blanche now serves as acting attorney general and AG nominee; the policy change extends precisely the kind of authority that a procedurally clean version of Maxwell’s transfer would have required.
Read: ‘I Love You, Sir’: The Problems Facing Todd Blanche’s Attorney General Nomination
The Bureau of Prisons confirmed the transfer but has not provided a public explanation. The DOJ acknowledged receiving the congressional inquiry but has not publicly responded.
Information for this story was found via the sources and companies mentioned. The author has no securities or affiliations related to the organizations discussed. Not a recommendation to buy or sell. Always do additional research and consult a professional before purchasing a security. The author holds no licenses.
