Mace, Subramanyam file bill to cover legal fees for Epstein defamation claim winners, say push will continue under either party

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace and U.S. Rep. Subramanyam said they filed legislation Monday intended to protect survivors of abuse from the legal costs associated with defamation lawsuits, while reiterating they plan to keep pushing work connected to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation regardless of which party controls the House in the next Congress. The two lawmakers framed the measure as a way to remove a financial barrier that can deter people from seeking redress in court, particularly when they must litigate against claims they say are false.

According to The Hill, Mace said the bill she filed Monday would cover legal fees for survivors who win defamation cases brought against them. The proposal is designed around a specific outcome in civil litigation, where a plaintiff would bear the burden of proving falsity and harm and, if successful, would receive help with attorneys’ fees and related costs.

Mace and Subramanyam also said they would continue pursuing the Epstein investigation’s remaining legislative and oversight work “under either party,” emphasizing that the inquiry should not depend on which political conference holds power. Their statements point to a continuity strategy for committees and investigative staff work that can carry over between sessions even as majority status changes.

The Hill reported the lawmakers’ comments as part of a broader effort by House members to keep attention on the Epstein case and related allegations, with lawmakers using both legislative tools and oversight authority. Mace and Subramanyam’s approach ties the investigation to follow-on legal and policy steps, including measures they say reduce the risk that surviving victims face prohibitive costs when pursuing claims.

Legal fee shifting proposals for defamation cases have been a recurring feature of U.S. legislative debates over speech, due process, and remedies in civil court. Supporters typically argue that fee coverage prevents survivors from being deterred by litigation expense, while critics often contend that fee policies can affect litigation behavior and raise concerns about the breadth of speech protections. The specific scope of the bill, including eligibility limits and how costs would be calculated, would be determined by the bill text and any committee markup.

The next procedural step will be House consideration of the legislation filed Monday, including committee review and possible amendments. If advanced, the bill would require action by the House and, if approved, further steps in the Senate before becoming law, subject to any presidential action.

Separately from the legislation itself, Mace and Subramanyam’s pledge to continue pushing the Epstein investigation under either party indicates they expect the House to maintain investigative momentum through the next legislative cycle. Which committees would handle any follow-on subpoenas, hearing schedules, or staff work would depend on House committee leadership and jurisdiction after any leadership changes.