WASHINGTON, D.C. — Leon Black filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the House Oversight Committee to contest two subpoenas. He also refused to appear for a scheduled sworn deposition before the committee on Thursday, leaving an empty chair at the hearing.

In his federal complaint, Black argues the subpoenas are invalid because they bear no legitimate connection to the committee's legislative purpose. The lawsuit further contends that turning over nondisclosure agreements would expose women who value their privacy and have no known or public connection to Epstein.

Susan Estrich, an attorney for Leon Black, said in a press release that the committee "is on a fishing expedition." She added, "This is no longer about finding the truth about Epstein. It is about trying to destroy Mr. Black. We were left with no choice but to file this lawsuit in response to an abuse of Congressional power."

Garcia rejected the legal challenge as a delay tactic. "By refusing to testify today, Leon Black is now defying two Congressional subpoenas," Garcia said. He accused Black of having funded Epstein's abuse and trafficking of women. Garcia also stated that multiple women have accused Black of sexual assault.

The representative cited specific financial figures in his criticism. Garcia stated that Black gave Epstein over $180 million over six years. During his June appearance, Black acknowledged paying Epstein $158 million for his work. Black stated during that appearance that he first met Epstein in the 1990s and began paying him for wealth management advice in 2013.

Black has maintained he was unaware of Epstein's crimes for many years. He stated in a previous statement that he did not know about Epstein's nefarious activity until Epstein was charged with trafficking in July 2019. However, Black acknowledged that he knew about Epstein pleading guilty in 2008 to state charges relating to prostitution involving a minor. His attorneys stated that he had no awareness of the criminal activities that led to Epstein's arrest in 2019.

Legal representatives for Black issued denials regarding personal conduct. They stated that he never abused a woman, was never with an underage woman, never engaged in sex trafficking, never paid Epstein for access to women, and was never blackmailed by Epstein. Black stated he feels terrible for Epstein's victims.

Court filings show Black discussed a nondisclosure agreement with only Epstein and a private investigator. Documents released by the committee include a poem attributed to Black in a collection of birthday messages to Epstein that refers to "Blond, Red or Brunette, spread out geographically." More than a dozen survivors of Epstein's abuse called on Black to appear before the committee and comply with subpoenas.

Black is the former CEO of Apollo Global Management, which he co-founded in 1990 with Marc Rowan and Josh Harris. He resigned from the firm and from his role as chairman of the Museum of Modern Art, a position he held from 2018 to 2021, in the wake of revelations about his business ties to Epstein. Senator Susan Collins has accepted donations from Black.

Timeline

During the June 26 proceedings, Leon Black said, "With hindsight, I now see that Epstein exaggerated, embellished, manipulated, and outright lied — prolifically and without concern for me or my family. And I now see that his deceit was not limited to me but also extended to numerous highly sophisticated individuals. Epstein took credit for other people's ideas. He falsely claimed to have been involved in decisions about investments." On that same date, Leon Black acknowledged paying Jeffrey Epstein $158 million for his work.

The House Oversight Committee issued two subpoenas to Leon Black in June following a voluntary closed-door interview. Leon Black stated during his June appearance that he first met Jeffrey Epstein in the 1990s and began paying him for wealth management advice in 2013. He abruptly left the voluntary interview before the House Oversight Committee in June after refusing to answer questions about nondisclosure agreements. He stated he feels terrible for Jeffrey Epstein's victims.

What's New

Additional reporting confirms that on June 26, 2026, Leon Black walked out of a closed-door interview with the House Oversight Committee after refusing to answer questions about nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) related to Jeffrey Epstein. The committee subsequently issued two subpoenas for Black to provide a deposition and information. Representative Robert Garcia stated that Leon Black gave Jeffrey Epstein over $180 million over six years.

The House Oversight Committee issued two subpoenas to Leon Black on June 26, 2026, one compelling him to participate in a deposition and another to turn over any NDAs. A House Oversight Committee spokesperson stated that Black's attorney confirmed Black would appear for a deposition on September 3, 2026, and he would turn over the NDAs sometime next week.

More than a dozen survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's abuse called on Leon Black to appear before the House Oversight Committee and comply with subpoenas. The House Oversight Committee scheduled Leon Black's deposition for September 3, 2026, as confirmed by a House Oversight Committee spokesperson. Research titled "Generating Nationally Representative Estimates of Multi-Generational Families and Related Statistics for Black Families in the PSID" was published in 2026.

How Sources Differ

Representative Robert Garcia provided differing details regarding the financial scope of Black's payments. He said, "By refusing to testify today, Leon Black is now defying two Congressional subpoenas."

Why It Matters

The confrontation shows the ongoing congressional effort to investigate the network surrounding Jeffrey Epstein and the extent of his influence among wealthy and powerful individuals. Black's refusal to comply with subpoenas and his subsequent lawsuit test the limits of congressional oversight authority when faced with legal challenges from high-profile subjects. The committee seeks to determine whether nondisclosure agreements were used to silence victims or conceal illegal activity.

The case involves large financial sums and allegations of serious misconduct. With more than a dozen survivors calling for compliance, the outcome may affect how future committees pursue testimony from uncooperative witnesses. The legal battle in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia will determine the validity of the subpoenas and could set a precedent for similar investigations into private financial arrangements linked to criminal enterprises.