Congressman Faces Criticism for Defending Colleague’s Communication with Jeffrey Epstein

Representative Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) has drawn sharp criticism for his defense of U.S. Virgin Islands Delegate Stacey Plaskett’s text exchanges with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a 2019 congressional hearing.

Speaking on the House floor Tuesday, Raskin characterized Plaskett’s communication with Epstein as merely “taking a phone call from her constituent,” a characterization that quickly sparked backlash from both Republican lawmakers and the White House’s Rapid Response team, which described his remarks as “sick.”

“They want to give them another headline! Which is, that they’ve arraigned a Democratic member for taking a phone call from her constituent, Jeffrey Epstein, in the middle of a hearing,” Raskin said during debate over a Republican-led censure resolution. “Are we saying just because they were on a phone call, they’re guilty of something? We should strip them of their committee assignments. We should censure them. Have we gotten to that point?”

The controversy stems from a 2019 House hearing where Plaskett was caught texting with Epstein, whose primary residence was in the U.S. Virgin Islands, during former Trump attorney Michael Cohen’s testimony about his work with the former president. The hearing was part of an ongoing probe into Trump’s business dealings and matters related to the 2016 election.

Republicans, led by Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), introduced a resolution to censure Plaskett for what they described as “inappropriate coordination with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein” that “reflects discreditably on the House of Representatives.”

Critics have pointed out that Raskin’s defense omits significant context about Plaskett’s relationship with Epstein. Independent journalist Lee Fang, formerly with The Intercept, called Raskin’s characterization “incredibly dishonest,” noting that court filings suggest a much deeper connection between Plaskett and Epstein.

“Plaskett helped Epstein while serving in the Virgin Islands government with tax credits, went on to work directly for Epstein’s fixer, then received lavish campaign support from Epstein and his aides to clinch her election victory,” Fang wrote in response to Raskin’s comments.

Fang had previously reported in 2023 that, despite Plaskett’s attempts to distance herself from the disgraced financier and claims she had no knowledge of campaign donations from him, evidence suggested otherwise. According to his reporting, “Plaskett not only repeatedly sought financial contributions from Epstein and had multiple face-to-face encounters with him, but she also worked directly for a St. Thomas-based law firm that played a role in cultivating influence for Epstein’s clandestine activities.”

The report also noted Plaskett’s previous service as an attorney on the Virgin Islands Economic Development Authority, which allegedly granted Epstein hundreds of millions in “improperly obtained tax exemptions over the course of two decades.”

Adding another layer to the controversy, some critics highlighted that Raskin was Plaskett’s former professor at American University’s law school, suggesting a personal connection that might influence his defense.

Plaskett herself addressed the House floor to defend her actions, claiming there was “no public knowledge at that time” that Epstein was under federal investigation when she communicated with him during the 2019 hearing.

“I began to get innumerable texts from friends, from foes, from constituents about what was happening in that hearing. And I got a text from Jeffrey Epstein, who, at the time, was my constituent,” Plaskett stated. “I don’t need to get advice on how to question anybody from any individual. I have been a lawyer for 30 years.”

Despite the controversy and Republican efforts, the resolution to censure Plaskett and strip her of her committee assignments failed Tuesday night in a House vote. The episode represents the latest flashpoint in increasingly partisan debates on Capitol Hill over ethics, accountability, and the Epstein scandal’s lingering impact on American politics.