Rep. Suhas Subramanyam says "We just unanimously voted to hold Leon Black in contempt of Congress"
Member of the House Oversight Committee, in a post on X with an attached video
“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.”
Source and context
Original post
About this source
Post by a member of the Oversight Committee, with a short attached video, published after the House agreed to the contempt resolution.
Original text
About this source
Congress.gov action history for H. Res. 1543. It lists consideration by unanimous consent and agreement to the resolution without objection on September 16, 2026.
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, after the Oversight Committee voted 41 to 0 on September 15 to recommend it.
After the quotation
The post appeared at 2:53 p.m. Eastern time on September 16, after the House agreed to the resolution at 2:36 p.m., according to Congress.gov. The committee's report says Black made payments to Epstein totaling over $158 million and potentially exceeding $170 million.
How this statement is classified
Case context: Was the House justified in holding Leon Black in contempt of Congress over the Epstein inquiry?
The label describes this statement’s response within the context above.
Why this label?
Relative to the decision to hold Black in contempt, Subramanyam announces the action approvingly and says Black is refusing to hand over documents central to the investigation. That is support for the action itself.
- 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
“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.”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