New Mexico Sues the Justice Department Over Zorro Ranch Epstein Files
Snapshot
Case: State of New Mexico v. United States Department of Justice and Todd Blanche
Case number: 1:26 cv 02762
Court: United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Filed: August 5, 2026
Plaintiff: State of New Mexico, represented by Attorney General Raúl Torrez
Defendants: United States Department of Justice and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in his official capacity
Document: 40 page federal complaint
Issue: Access to unredacted federal investigative records concerning Jeffrey Epstein, his associates, Zorro Ranch, and possible crimes committed in New Mexico
Relief requested: Court orders setting aside the Justice Department’s denial and requiring the agency to evaluate and respond to New Mexico’s records request lawfully
Key takeaway: New Mexico alleges that federal prosecutors persuaded the state to suspend its Epstein investigation in 2019, promised to return information about possible state crimes, and then refused to provide the unredacted evidence needed when New Mexico reopened its investigation in 2026.
What New Mexico Filed
The New Mexico Department of Justice announced the federal lawsuit on August 5, 2026.
The complaint names the United States Department of Justice and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche as defendants. Blanche is sued only in his official capacity.
New Mexico is not asking the District of Columbia court to decide whether a particular Epstein associate committed a crime at Zorro Ranch. Instead, the state is challenging the federal government’s response to its demand for investigative records.
The complaint argues that the Justice Department’s denial was arbitrary, capricious, contrary to law, and inconsistent with its own regulations. Alternatively, New Mexico argues that the department unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed required agency action.
These are allegations in a newly filed civil case. The court has not yet ruled that the Justice Department violated the law.
What New Mexico Is Investigating
Attorney General Raúl Torrez reopened New Mexico’s criminal investigation into possible crimes at Zorro Ranch in February 2026.
The complaint says investigators are examining potential violations involving homicide, kidnapping, criminal sexual penetration, criminal sexual contact, and human trafficking.
The state is investigating possible conduct by Epstein, Maxwell, and other associates. It is also attempting to identify additional survivors, witnesses, employees, contractors, and possible perpetrators connected to the ranch.
New Mexico searched the former Zorro Ranch property in March 2026. According to the complaint, this was the first law enforcement search of the property.
The investigation does not mean that every person who visited, worked at, or received money connected to Zorro Ranch committed a crime. Investigators must determine each person’s conduct and knowledge from admissible evidence.
Why Zorro Ranch Is Central to the Case
Epstein purchased the New Mexico property in 1993. The ranch became one of several residences associated with his travel, staff, guests, and abuse allegations.
Federal records document that survivors were taken to New Mexico. They also contain testimony describing grooming and sexual abuse connected to the state.
The complaint says the released Epstein files contain more than 13,000 references to Zorro Ranch and approximately 5,000 references to New Mexico. Those figures are allegations drawn from the state’s review of the released corpus.
The Justice Department’s prosecution memorandum concerning Epstein’s potential co conspirators includes allegations involving conduct at the ranch. New Mexico argues that the redactions prevent state investigators from identifying important witnesses and possible uncharged participants.
Another federal investigative record concerning New Mexico recounts a survivor’s statement that her first assault occurred in New Mexico while Epstein and another person were present.
The identity of that additional person is redacted in the public record. New Mexico argues that investigators need the unredacted version to determine who was present and whether state charges remain possible.
The 2019 New Mexico Investigation
The complaint says the New Mexico Attorney General’s Office began investigating possible crimes at Zorro Ranch in February 2019.
Between February and July 2019, state investigators reportedly contacted and interviewed survivors who described sexual abuse in New Mexico by Epstein, his associates, and people formerly connected to the ranch.
On May 14, 2019, New Mexico informed federal prosecutors that it had an active investigation. The state requested coordination so the investigations would not interfere with each other.
Federal prosecutors initially declined to share information. However, the complaint says the state and federal government reached an agreement during a July 23, 2019 telephone call.
According to New Mexico, the state agreed to suspend its sex trafficking investigation and turn its collected evidence over to the Southern District of New York.
In return, federal prosecutors allegedly agreed to provide New Mexico with information about possible state crimes discovered during the federal investigation.
Federal Records Document the Agreement
The federal email chain preserved as EFTA00019183 supports an important portion of New Mexico’s account.
In the email chain, a federal prosecutor wrote that the New Mexico Attorney General’s Office had agreed to stop investigating sex trafficking and provide the information it had collected.
The same federal record states that prosecutors would pass along information gathered about state crimes committed in New Mexico after the federal case concluded.
A separate investigative record identified as EFTA01681971 also refers to the arrangement between federal and state authorities.
On September 17, 2019, New Mexico transferred its investigative file to federal prosecutors. According to the complaint, the production included police reports, recorded witness interviews, and materials concerning Epstein’s use of New Mexico public land.
The state also asked federal prosecutors to notify New Mexico if their investigation identified additional survivors of crimes committed within the state.
What New Mexico Says It Lost
New Mexico argues that suspending its investigation carried serious consequences.
The state says it lost timely access to survivors, witnesses, employees, contractors, records, and physical evidence. Memories can fade, witnesses can become unavailable, properties can change ownership, and documents can be lost.
The complaint alleges that federal law enforcement never searched Zorro Ranch after New Mexico suspended its investigation.
One August 2019 federal record acknowledged a report involving a survivor who may have been raped at the New Mexico residence. However, the record stated that investigators did not believe they had probable cause to search the property.
The document does not establish whether investigators later developed additional evidence that could have supported a warrant.
New Mexico also asked federal prosecutors to consider seizing Epstein’s New Mexico properties for the potential benefit of survivors. The complaint says federal officials did not pursue that request.
What Happened After Epstein’s Death
Epstein died in federal custody in August 2019. His death ended the possibility of prosecuting him personally.
However, New Mexico continued asking federal prosecutors about possible associates, state crimes, forfeiture, and evidence tied to Zorro Ranch.
In July 2020, after Maxwell’s arrest, New Mexico again offered assistance. The state informed federal prosecutors that it intended to pursue viable state charges.
The complaint says federal prosecutors promised to contact New Mexico if they discovered viable state charges not already covered by the federal investigation.
That information was never provided, according to the state.
Federal officials in New Mexico also noted that conduct in New Mexico formed part of the allegations against Maxwell. They reportedly asked the Southern District of New York about the possible seizure or forfeiture of Epstein’s New Mexico property.
The state alleges that no action followed.
The Maxwell Evidence From New Mexico
Maxwell’s federal prosecution included allegations and testimony involving New Mexico.
The complaint cites grand jury material, witness interviews, trial testimony, and prosecution records describing abuse or grooming connected to the state.
The grand jury related record EFTA00008631 contains testimony concerning conduct in New Mexico.
The trial transcript preserved as EFTA00068582 includes testimony from a survivor who described being sexually assaulted in New Mexico while she was a minor.
A federal appeals court later determined that the New Mexico testimony fell within the conduct charged in Maxwell’s indictment.
A jury convicted Maxwell in December 2021. She was sentenced to 20 years in federal prison in June 2022.
The conviction establishes Maxwell’s criminal responsibility for the charges decided by the jury. It does not resolve every possible state crime or determine the responsibility of every person who may have been present in New Mexico.
Why New Mexico Reopened the Investigation
Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act in November 2025. The law required the Justice Department to release unclassified records connected to Epstein, Maxwell, and their associates, subject to specific protections.
The Justice Department released millions of pages during late 2025 and early 2026.
New Mexico says the release revealed that federal authorities possessed far more information about conduct in New Mexico than the federal government had provided to the state.
However, many names and identifying details were redacted in the public files. New Mexico argues that these redactions prevent investigators from identifying witnesses, corroborating testimony, reconstructing travel, issuing subpoenas, and determining whether living suspects can be charged.
The state reopened its investigation in February 2026 and began requesting access to unredacted federal records.
The Burial Allegation Document
New Mexico’s first 2026 request focused on EFTA01250229.
That document contains an anonymous message alleging that two female victims had been buried on land surrounding Zorro Ranch. The message also included an extortion demand involving Bitcoin.
The allegation has not been established as true.
The document proves that the message existed and entered the federal evidence system. It does not prove that remains were buried at the ranch or that the anonymous sender possessed genuine inside information.
New Mexico requested the complete version of the document and all related investigative records. The state wanted to determine whether federal investigators identified the sender, evaluated the allegation, searched the land, examined the cryptocurrency address, or collected corroborating evidence.
Investigators must treat the burial claim as an unverified lead unless physical, testimonial, or documentary evidence confirms it.
The Documents New Mexico Requested
On March 13, 2026, Attorney General Torrez requested unredacted copies of five additional documents.
Those records included EFTA00006970, EFTA00008631, EFTA00068582, EFTA02731082, and EFTA01873236.
The records include survivor accounts, testimony, federal analysis, and references to conduct at Zorro Ranch.
New Mexico also requested access to other unredacted investigative materials concerning Epstein, Maxwell, their associates, potential survivors, and the New Mexico property.
The state offered to send investigators to Washington to inspect the records in person under security and confidentiality restrictions.
What Is a Touhy Request?
A Touhy request is a formal demand for testimony or records held by a federal agency when the federal government is not a party to the underlying investigation or proceeding.
The name comes from the United States Supreme Court decision in United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen.
Federal agencies use Touhy regulations to decide whether employees may testify or whether agency records may be released.
New Mexico initially requested the records through ordinary communication between law enforcement agencies. According to the complaint, Justice Department officials then directed the state to submit a formal Touhy request.
New Mexico submitted that request on May 3, 2026.
The state described the potential crimes under investigation, identified specific EFTA documents, explained why unredacted information was necessary, and offered to accept security restrictions.
New Mexico Says the Justice Department Delayed Its Response
The complaint documents repeated follow up efforts during May, June, and July 2026.
New Mexico contacted the District of New Mexico United States Attorney’s Office, the Albuquerque FBI office, Justice Department officials in Washington, and the Southern District of New York.
Federal officials publicly said they anticipated cooperation. According to the complaint, however, the state did not receive the requested investigative evidence.
New Mexico eventually received 31 pages from the federal prosecutor’s office in New Mexico.
The state says the production consisted largely of public material, earlier correspondence, a local newspaper article, redacted emails, and corporate records already available elsewhere.
New Mexico argues that the production did not provide the unredacted evidence needed for its investigation.
Why Federal Prosecutors Rejected the Request
The complaint identifies several reasons given by federal prosecutors.
The District of New Mexico reportedly argued that the request was too broad and burdensome. It also cited the Privacy Act and protective orders entered in the Epstein and Maxwell prosecutions.
The Southern District of New York reportedly told New Mexico that releasing unredacted records could violate survivor privacy and the protective orders.
New Mexico asked whether federal prosecutors would help seek a modification or clarification of those orders. According to the complaint, federal officials said such cooperation was unlikely.
The Justice Department has not yet filed its formal answer in the lawsuit. Its complete legal position may therefore include arguments not described in New Mexico’s complaint.
New Mexico’s Privacy Argument
New Mexico argues that it is not requesting public disclosure of survivor identities.
The state says the records would be reviewed by law enforcement and used only for its criminal investigation or a resulting prosecution.
The complaint points to a Privacy Act provision permitting disclosure to another government agency for authorized civil or criminal law enforcement activity when the head of that agency submits a proper written request.
Attorney General Torrez submitted written demands identifying the records and the investigation for which they were needed.
New Mexico also offered to comply with security protocols and confidentiality restrictions.
The court will have to determine whether the requested records qualify for disclosure and whether additional legal restrictions apply.
New Mexico’s Protective Order Argument
The state argues that the Epstein and Maxwell protective orders prohibit public disclosure, not confidential sharing with another law enforcement agency.
The complaint points to language allowing federal prosecutors to use protected material while carrying out their professional responsibilities.
New Mexico also argues that the Justice Department has supported information sharing with state authorities in other cases.
Most importantly, the complaint says members of Congress have been permitted to inspect unredacted material in a Justice Department reading room.
The state argues that denying comparable access to criminal investigators is inconsistent and arbitrary.
Whether the protective orders permit the requested disclosure will be one of the central legal issues in the case.
The Two Legal Claims
The first claim challenges the Justice Department’s denial under the Administrative Procedure Act.
New Mexico alleges that the denial was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, contrary to law, and beyond the authority granted to the agency.
The state argues that the Justice Department did not apply the factors required by its own Touhy regulations. Those factors include the seriousness of the suspected crimes, the accused person’s criminal history, the importance of the requested relief, and the needs of justice.
The second claim addresses agency action that was unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed.
New Mexico argues that if the Justice Department has not issued a final decision, the months of delay still violate federal administrative law.
These claims concern the agency’s decision making process. The lawsuit does not ask the court to prosecute Epstein associates directly.
What New Mexico Wants the Court to Order
New Mexico asks the court to declare that the Justice Department’s denial is final agency action subject to judicial review.
It also asks the court to declare the denial unlawful, set it aside, and require the Justice Department to evaluate the request under the Administrative Procedure Act and its own regulations.
The state seeks an order compelling the Justice Department to take all legally required action. That could include producing records if the court determines that federal law requires their release.
New Mexico also requests litigation costs and any additional relief the court considers appropriate.
What the Lawsuit Does Not Establish
The complaint does not prove that every allegation concerning Zorro Ranch is true.
It does not establish that two victims were buried on the property.
It does not identify every redacted person or prove that every employee, guest, contractor, pilot, lawyer, or associate participated in a crime.
It does not establish that the Justice Department intentionally protected a particular person.
It does provide documentary evidence that New Mexico suspended part of its investigation, transferred its files to federal prosecutors, and expected information about possible state crimes to be returned.
The central factual dispute concerns whether federal officials honored that arrangement and whether the department lawfully handled New Mexico’s 2026 request.
Key Takeaways
New Mexico filed suit against the Justice Department and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on August 5, 2026.
The state is seeking unredacted federal evidence for an active criminal investigation involving possible crimes at Zorro Ranch.
Federal records support New Mexico’s claim that the state agreed to suspend its sex trafficking investigation and transfer its evidence to federal prosecutors in 2019.
The complaint says federal prosecutors promised to provide information about state crimes discovered during their investigation.
New Mexico alleges that this information was never provided.
The released Epstein files contain testimony, interviews, and federal analysis involving abuse in New Mexico.
Redactions prevent state investigators from identifying some witnesses, possible perpetrators, and people allegedly present during assaults.
The Justice Department cited privacy restrictions, protective orders, burden, and procedural objections when refusing the request.
New Mexico argues that confidential law enforcement access would protect survivors while allowing the state to investigate crimes within its jurisdiction.
The court has not yet ruled on the merits of New Mexico’s allegations.
Why This Case Matters
This lawsuit could determine whether New Mexico gains access to evidence that federal investigators collected after the state suspended its own investigation.
That evidence may help investigators identify survivors, corroborating witnesses, ranch personnel, additional suspects, and records that can still be obtained through warrants or subpoenas.
The case also tests how federal privacy protections and court orders should operate when another law enforcement agency is investigating serious crimes.
Protecting survivors and allowing legitimate investigation are not mutually exclusive. Records can be shared under controlled conditions without publishing identities or private information.
For researchers, the lawsuit offers a documented timeline connecting New Mexico’s 2019 investigation, the federal prosecution, the Maxwell case, the public EFTA release, and the state’s renewed effort to investigate Zorro Ranch.
The EpsteinWiki Search Hub can be used to compare the named EFTA documents with flight records, witness testimony, property entities, staff records, and other evidence connected to New Mexico.
Sources
- New Mexico Department of Justice Lawsuit Announcement
- New Mexico and Southern District of New York Agreement Statement
- EFTA00019183 Federal Email Chain
- EFTA01681971 Investigative Record
- EFTA00165502 New Mexico Search Discussion
- EFTA01250229 Anonymous Zorro Ranch Allegation
- EFTA00006970 New Mexico Evidence
- EFTA00008631 Grand Jury Related Evidence
- EFTA00068582 Maxwell Trial Testimony
- EFTA02731082 Potential Co Conspirator Prosecution Memorandum
- EFTA01873236 New Mexico Evidence
- EFTA01245688 FBI Interview Record
- United States Department of Justice Maxwell Case Page
- Epstein Data Zorro Ranch Investigation Report
- EpsteinWiki Search Hub
- EpsteinWiki Network Mapping Guide