Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted child sex trafficker serving 20 years for facilitating Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse of girls as young as 14, filed a Supreme Court brief Monday claiming a 2007 agreement should have protected her from prosecution — capping months of escalating controversy over the Trump administration’s handling of Epstein files.
Maxwell’s conviction stems from her role in a decade-long scheme from 1994 to 2004. According to court documents, Maxwell “assisted, facilitated, and participated in Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse of minor girls.” The DOJ stated Maxwell “attended certain sexual encounters between minor victims and Epstein” and “in some instances, MAXWELL participated in the sexual abuse of minor victims.”
At Maxwell’s 2021 trial, victims described how she groomed them through seemingly innocent activities before facilitating their abuse. One victim, testifying as “Carolyn,” said Maxwell told her when she was 14 that she “had a great body for Epstein and his friends.”
Sponsored · Selkirk Copper Mines
Federal prosecutors characterized Maxwell harshly in a 2022 sentencing memo, describing her as having engaged in a “significant pattern of dishonest conduct” and said she “befriended her victims, won their trust, slowly broke down their boundaries, and normalized sexual abuse.”
The current controversy began building in March 2025, when supervisors instructed FBI agents reviewing Epstein files to specifically “flag” any documents mentioning Trump’s name, according to Senator Richard Durbin. The review involved approximately 1,000 FBI personnel working “24-hour shifts.”
In May 2025, Attorney General Pam Bondi briefed President Donald Trump that DOJ files mentioned his name “multiple times” regarding Epstein, multiple reports indicate. The administration subsequently decided to withhold documents from public release, sparking criticism from Trump’s own supporters.
Related: House Panel Votes to Subpoena Justice Department for Epstein Files
Sponsored · Altamira Gold Corp.
Last week, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche held unprecedented meetings with Maxwell — sessions that former prosecutors described as “highly unusual” and “potentially unprecedented” for the department’s No. 2 official. The DOJ granted Maxwell limited immunity and she reportedly discussed “maybe 100 different people” connected to the case.
Monday’s Supreme Court filing directly acknowledges this timing. Maxwell’s attorney David Oscar Markus made a direct appeal to Trump: “President Trump built his legacy in part on the power of a deal,” while calling Maxwell a “scapegoat” for Epstein’s crimes.
Maxwell’s legal argument centers on a 2007 non-prosecution agreement that stated “the United States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein.” Her team argues this should apply nationwide, not just in Florida where prosecutors made the deal.
Federal prosecutors maintain the agreement only bound the Florida district and have urged the Supreme Court to reject Maxwell’s appeal. They note prosecutors charged Maxwell for conduct from 1994-1997, which predated the Florida investigation period.
The Supreme Court will decide this fall whether to hear the case. Trump could also just cut a deal and give her a pardon.
However, a CNN analysis suggests the Trump administration could potentially assist Maxwell through her appeals process rather than an outright pardon, noting the DOJ could theoretically reverse its opposition to her Supreme Court petition. Such assistance “seems to work better as a carrot for Maxwell than as a legitimate possibility,” the analysis noted, potentially influencing her cooperation with ongoing investigations.
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.
