Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
Ghislaine Maxwell is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn her 2021 sex trafficking conviction, arguing that a 2007 non-prosecution agreement (NPA) with financier Jeffrey Epstein should have protected her from federal charges. In a petition filed Monday, Maxwell’s attorneys said the government has a legal and moral obligation to honor the deal, regardless of where charges were filed or against whom.
“Plea and non-prosecution agreements resolve nearly every federal case,” Maxwell’s legal team wrote in their brief. “They routinely include promises that extend to others—co-conspirators, family members, potential witnesses. If those promises mean different things in different parts of the country, then trust in our system collapses.”
Background: The Epstein Agreement
The non-prosecution agreement was brokered in 2007 between Epstein and federal prosecutors in the Southern District of Florida. In exchange for pleading guilty to state prostitution charges, Epstein and, by the government’s written promise, his alleged “co-conspirators,” would not face federal charges. That agreement became the subject of widespread scrutiny following Epstein’s 2019 arrest in New York and his subsequent death in jail.
Maxwell was arrested in 2020 and charged in the Southern District of New York with grooming and trafficking underage girls for Epstein. She was convicted in December 2021 and sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Legal Argument: No Exceptions in the Deal
Maxwell’s attorneys contend that the non-prosecution agreement was not limited by geography, timing, or the identity of the co-conspirators.
“It is not geographically limited to the Southern District of Florida,” the brief argues. “It is not conditioned on the co-conspirators being known by the government at the time… and it contains no other caveat or exception. This should be the end of the discussion.”
They also challenge the Justice Department’s position that Maxwell cannot enforce the NPA because she was not a direct party to it. “Petitioner’s alleged status as Epstein’s co-conspirator was the entire basis of her prosecution,” the brief states.
In a separate statement, Maxwell’s attorney David Oscar Markus appealed to the Supreme Court — and to former President Donald Trump.
“No one is above the law—not even the Southern District of New York,” Markus said. “President Trump built his legacy in part on the power of a deal — and surely he would agree that when the United States gives its word, it must stand by it.”
Government Response: Agreement Doesn’t Bind New York
Federal prosecutors have consistently maintained that the NPA applied only within the jurisdiction of the Southern District of Florida. They argue it did not shield Maxwell from charges brought in New York more than a decade later.
The Justice Department has urged the justices to reject the petition, asserting that Maxwell has no legal standing to enforce an agreement she did not sign.
Still, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche met with Maxwell’s legal team last week, according to sources familiar with the matter, though the DOJ has not publicly commented on the meeting.
Reactions and Broader Context
Maxwell’s case has remained a legal and cultural flashpoint since her trial, with supporters arguing she has become a scapegoat for Epstein’s crimes, and critics calling her conviction a small measure of justice for his many victims.
Legal experts are split on the validity of the NPA argument. “Non-prosecution agreements can sometimes extend to third parties, but it’s rare and highly context-specific,” said former federal prosecutor Shan Wu. “The fact that the SDNY was not party to the original deal is a major hurdle for Maxwell.”
Victims’ advocates have previously blasted the 2007 deal as overly lenient and secretive. “This is an outrageous attempt to escape accountability,” said attorney Lisa Bloom, who has represented Epstein survivors. “The Supreme Court should reject this effort to rewrite history.”
Next Steps: Will the Court Take the Case?
The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether it will take up Maxwell’s appeal. The justices could reject the petition outright, request a response from the Justice Department, or agree to hear arguments in a future term.
Maxwell, who is serving her sentence at a federal prison in Florida, remains one of the highest-profile figures ensnared by the Epstein scandal. Her case continues to test the boundaries of plea agreements, prosecutorial discretion, and the long shadow of Epstein’s crimes.
