Black's attorneys call the House contempt action "politically motivated and completely retaliatory"
Attorney for Leon Black (Estrich Goldin LLP), in a statement issued jointly with Aaron Cutler of Hogan Lovells Cadwalader
“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.”
Source and context
Reporting
About this source
CNBC report on the House action. It quotes Black's attorneys at length and a Justice Department spokesperson's statement about the expected referral.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Reporting
About this source
NBC News report on the House action that quotes the statement from Black's attorneys, Comer and Garcia.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Reporting
About this source
Politico report on the House action that quotes the attorneys' statement and Comer's and Garcia's statements.
Reporting
About this source
Forbes report on the House action. It states the House acted by unanimous consent with no debate or roll call and quotes Black's attorneys.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)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
Court docket for Black's lawsuit, assigned to Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. The entries viewed run from the complaint on September 3 through appearance filings on September 9 and include no ruling.
Before the quotation
The House agreed to the contempt resolution by unanimous consent on September 16, 2026, without a recorded vote.
After the quotation
The attorneys said they intend to pursue Black's lawsuit against the committee and Comer. The CourtListener copy of the docket, last updated September 18, listed no ruling on Black's claims.
How this statement is classified
Responding to: In a federal complaint, Leon Black alleged that the House Oversight Committee's two subpoenas are invalid to the extent they exceed its delegated authority by seeking private information that has no legitimate connection to its legislative purpose.
The label describes this statement’s response within the context above.
Why this label?
Relative to the decision to hold Black in contempt, the attorneys reject it as retaliatory and based on invalid subpoenas, and say the House ignored pending litigation and an ethics complaint. That is a condemnation of the action itself.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- James Comer Jr., House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
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“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 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