Expressing the opposition of the House of Representatives to any grant of commutation, clemency, or pardon to federally convicted child sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, who refuses to take responsibility for her crimes.
- Bill Number
- H.Res. 913
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Crime and Law Enforcement
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-11-25: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2025-12-02T16:29:44Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This House Resolution (H. Res. 913) aims to formally express the opposition of the U.S. House of Representatives to any commutation (reduction of sentence), clemency (mercy relief short of pardon), or pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell, a convicted child sex trafficker. It highlights her lack of remorse for crimes committed with Jeffrey Epstein, supports victims, and calls for the full release of related Epstein files.
Key Provisions
The resolution includes several "Whereas" clauses providing background, followed by a "Resolved" section outlining the House's positions:
- Background Clauses:
- Describes Maxwell as a co-conspirator in Epstein's international child sex trafficking operation.
- Notes her 20-year prison sentence for exploiting and abusing minor girls over a decade.
- Lists her convictions: conspiracy to entice minors for illegal sex acts, transporting minors for illegal sex acts, sex trafficking conspiracy, and sex trafficking of a minor.
- States she has served only about one-fifth of her sentence (three years and four months as of the resolution's introduction).
- Emphasizes her refusal to accept responsibility, lack of remorse, continued lies about her actions, and disparagement of victims.
- Argues she fails Department of Justice criteria for clemency recommendations.
- Resolved Actions:
- Opposes any commutation, clemency, or pardon for Maxwell due to her denial of responsibility.
- Reiterates support for survivors and victims of Epstein and Maxwell.
- Reaffirms the need for complete release of the Epstein files (documents related to the case).
Significant Changes to Existing Law
This is a non-binding resolution, not a law or bill that amends statutes. It introduces no changes to existing legal frameworks, such as pardon processes under the U.S. Constitution (Article II, Section 2), which grants the President sole authority over federal pardons and clemency.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: May indirectly influence the Department of Justice's Office of the Pardon Attorney by highlighting criteria Maxwell allegedly fails, though it has no legal force. It could prompt further scrutiny of Epstein-related documents held by agencies like the FBI or courts.
- On Citizens: Provides symbolic support to victims, potentially aiding their emotional recovery and public advocacy. It raises awareness of child sex trafficking accountability but does not directly affect individual rights or services.
- On International Relations: Minimal impact, though Maxwell's case involves international elements (e.g., Epstein's global network); the resolution reinforces U.S. stance against such crimes without altering foreign policy.
Overall, effects are primarily political and rhetorical, pressuring the executive branch without enforceable outcomes.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Ghislaine Maxwell: Directly targeted, as the resolution opposes her potential early release and criticizes her behavior.
- Victims and Survivors: Beneficiaries through expressed House support and call for file releases, which could aid transparency and justice.
- U.S. House of Representatives: Represents the body's collective stance, introduced by Rep. Jamie Raskin and referred to the Judiciary Committee.
- Executive Branch (President and DOJ): Indirectly affected, as it comments on presidential pardon powers and DOJ clemency guidelines.
- Public and Advocacy Groups: Broader society, including anti-trafficking organizations, who may use it to advocate for victim rights.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces the non-binding nature of congressional resolutions; it cannot block a presidential pardon but underscores ethical considerations in clemency reviews (e.g., remorse as a factor).
- Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's implied power to express opinions via resolutions (under Article I), while respecting the President's exclusive pardon authority—potentially setting up a check-and-balance dynamic if a pardon is granted.
- Political: Serves as a partisan or bipartisan signal (introduced in a Democratic-led context) on high-profile accountability, especially amid ongoing Epstein case scrutiny. It could fuel debates on executive overreach in pardons or demands for transparency in federal investigations, without resolving underlying issues like file releases.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Recent Actions
- 2025-11-25: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2025-11-25: Submitted in House
- 2025-11-25: Submitted in House
Bill Versions
- Expressing the opposition of the House of Representatives to any grant of commutation, clemency, or pardon to federally convicted child sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, who refuses to take responsibility for her crimes. — issued 2025-11-25 — PDF (3 pages)