In the final weeks leading up to the midterm elections, Democratic candidates and affiliated groups nationwide have intensified a campaign accusing Republican contenders of shielding pedophiles by opposing early efforts to release files related to Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender linked to a high-profile sex-trafficking operation. These advertisements allege that certain Republicans voted against transparency measures, aiming to evoke emotional responses among voters by characterizing the candidates as protectors of Epstein and his crimes.
According to analyses by media organizations, over $35 million has been spent on Epstein-related advertising, with Democrats reportedly investing more than $40 million on such ads across six competitive Senate races.
In Colorado, Republican candidate Jeff Crank has been targeted for voting against the release of Epstein documents. One ad features relatives of Virginia Giuffre, a survivor of Epstein's abuses who died by suicide last year, accusing Crank of concealing Epstein’s crimes to safeguard former President Donald Trump. Crank’s campaign responded to these claims, describing the ad as “intentionally vague” and stressing Crank’s insistence that any release of documents should ensure the protection of victim privacy. Officials also noted that Crank engaged with Giuffre’s family members and other survivors before the vote but did not meet in person with Giuffre’s family.
In Iowa, Senate candidate Ashley Hinson faced accusations of protecting her donors by opposing the release of Epstein files, which she denied in a campaign advertisement addressing her children directly. Hinson acknowledged voting for the final Epstein Files Transparency Act but did not support an earlier parliamentary maneuver—a discharge petition—intended to expedite the files’ release.
Georgia Senate candidate Mike Collins was also criticized for voting against disclosing Epstein documents. An ad claimed Collins opposed releasing files despite awareness of Epstein’s exploitation of underage girls. Collins refuted this portrayal during a debate, asserting that his opponent, Jon Ossoff, had accepted campaign contributions from Reid Hoffman, a tech billionaire with indirect connections to Epstein. Hoffman has stated that his relationship with Epstein was limited to fundraising events and has expressed regret over the association.
In Florida, Republican Jimmy Patronis was accused by his Democratic challenger of dismissing the Epstein investigation. Patronis’ campaign clarified that he never labeled the investigation a “waste of time” but expressed concerns about the allocation of resources. His team highlighted his recent efforts to secure disaster relief funds following Hurricane Isaias, criticizing his opponent’s focus on Epstein-related issues.
Outside the Senate and House races, similar disputes have arisen. In New Mexico’s gubernatorial contest, a political group released an advertisement alleging that Democratic candidate Deb Haaland accepted rides on Epstein’s private jet and campaign donations linked to Epstein’s business interests. Haaland has denied boarding Epstein’s jet but acknowledged taking a flight booked through a company associated with Epstein, stating she was unaware of the connection.
Several Republicans have defended their records by emphasizing their support for the final Epstein Files Transparency Act, passed with broad bipartisan backing after Trump—who personally knew Epstein in the 1990s and early 2000s—eventually endorsed the legislation following initial resistance. At the time, party divisions were visible, with many House Republicans initially opposing the discharge petition that would have forced a vote on the files release until Trump’s change of stance prompted wider Republican support.
The controversy underscores the complexities in the midterm campaigns as candidates seek to leverage the sensitive Epstein case to sway voters, while opponents challenge the accuracy and motivations behind these accusations.