Garcia calls the contempt action "an important step towards justice and accountability"
Ranking Member of the House Oversight Committee, in a press release
“This vote is an important step towards justice and accountability. Leon Black has continued to defy two congressional subpoenas and we need to know why he gave Jeffrey Epstein $180 million dollars.”
Source and context
Official statement
About this source
Ranking Member Garcia's press release after the House agreed to the contempt resolution.
Original text
About this source
Official record of the House floor action on H. Res. 1543: Comer's request for unanimous consent, the absence of objection, and agreement to the resolution.
Original text
About this source
Committee roll call sheet for the vote to report the contempt resolution. It records 41 ayes and 0 noes, with 20 Republicans and 21 Democrats voting aye and six Republican members not recorded.
Original text
About this source
The committee's report on the contempt resolution. It sets out the subpoena history, the committee's account of Black's non-compliance, its response to the reasons Black gave, and the recorded committee vote. It states the committee's position, not a court finding.
Before the quotation
The House agreed to the contempt resolution by unanimous consent on September 16, 2026, the day after the Oversight Committee voted 41 to 0 to recommend it.
After the quotation
The release also says Garcia called on Black to be held in contempt earlier in September, after Black defied two subpoenas. The committee's report says Black made payments to Epstein totaling over $158 million and potentially exceeding $170 million.
How this statement is classified
Responding to: The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform said in House Report 119-831 that Leon Black willfully failed to comply with its June 26, 2026 deposition subpoena and document subpoena, and that his stated reasons for not complying are without merit.
The label describes this statement’s response within the context above.
Why this label?
Relative to the decision to hold Black in contempt, Garcia calls it an important step and says Black continued to defy two subpoenas. He supports the action itself, so the label is a defense rather than a challenge to how it is characterized.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Leon Black
Was the House justified in holding Leon Black in contempt of Congress over the Epstein inquiry?
Explore the case context, sources and public responses.
More from this case
Read the full case“an outrageous action that ignores the facts and the truth about Mr. Black ... The House of Representatives has rushed through every stage of this inquiry. ... The full House is holding him in contempt without any regard to the active litigation challenging the lawfulness of the Committee’s actions and the ethics complaint against Chairman Comer ... politically motivated and completely retaliatory by a Chairman who is focused solely on himself and his own political ambitions without any regard for the truth and the law. ... To think, he is being held in contempt over invalid subpoenas is ridiculous.”Read statement
“We just unanimously voted to hold Leon Black in contempt of Congress. His name appears in the Epstein files hundreds of times, and he gave Epstein $180 million. The survivors told us to follow the money and that is exactly what we are doing. ... Whatever happened, the reality is he has a lot of information, a lot of documents that are central to our investigation and he's refusing.”Read statement
“This Committee mark-up and contempt resolution is a complete abomination. The Committee under the leadership of Chairman James Comer and Ranking Member Robert Garcia has lost sight of its legislative purpose and is abusing its power. ... This is retaliation - plain and simple. We have the constitutional right to sue Chairman Comer and the Committee because the subpoenas issued were illegitimate, illegal, and a textbook abuse of power designed to bully and destroy legal protections of private citizens. ... He provided to the Committee the only NDA that was within the scope of the Committee's authority. ... This entire charade is about politics and ambition. ... there were more than enough reasons to postpone this mark-up and contempt resolution.”Read statement