Petition Filed on Dec 17 2025 in Manhattan Federal Court Ghislaine Maxwell submitted a habeas corpus petition on Dec 17, 2025, asking a Manhattan federal judge to set aside her Dec 2021 sex‑trafficking conviction and 20‑year sentence [1][2]. She argues that withheld evidence, false testimony, and “substantial new evidence” constitute constitutional violations that doomed her trial [1][2]. The filing follows a months‑long effort that began in August to secure a judicial review of her detention [2].

Timing Aligns with Epstein Files Transparency Act Deadline The petition arrived two days before the Justice Department must publicly release 18 categories of Epstein‑related investigative material by Dec 19, as mandated by the Epstein Files Transparency Act signed by President Trump [1][2]. Judge Paul A. Engelmayer approved the DOJ’s request to unseal the records while limiting identification to Epstein and Maxwell as having sexual contact with a minor [2]. The timing suggests Maxwell seeks to influence any future proceedings before the new evidence becomes public [1].

DOJ to Unseal Search Warrants, Financial Records, and Victim Interviews Under the transparency law, the Justice Department will disclose search warrants, financial documents, victim interview notes, and data recovered from electronic devices, among other materials [1]. Federal officials, including U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton, confirmed they will comply with the court order and the statute [1]. The breadth of the release is expected to provide unprecedented insight into the Epstein network and related investigations [1].

Conviction and Sentence Remain Under Challenge Maxwell was convicted in Dec 2021 of recruiting and grooming underage girls for Jeffrey Epstein and sentenced to 20 years in prison [1]. Her attorney, David Markus, warned that the unsealing of the records could introduce “untested and unproven allegations” that would prejudice any retrial, potentially making a fair proceeding impossible [1][2]. Despite the petition, the conviction remains in force pending judicial review [2].

No Major Discrepancies Across Reports Both Newsweek and the Associated Press report the same filing date, legal arguments, and the imminent DOJ release schedule, with only minor phrasing differences. Each source notes Judge Engelmayer’s approval of the record release and Markus’s concern about prejudice [1][2]. No contradictory facts appear between the two articles.