Leon Black Skips House Epstein Deposition, Sues Oversight Committee Over Subpoenas

Leon Black had a deposition scheduled Thursday morning in front of the House Oversight Committee. He didn't show up. Instead, his lawyers filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia trying to kill two subpoenas the committee issued against him back on June 26, according to CNBC and CBS News.

The committee held the session anyway, with an empty chair where Black was supposed to sit, according to The Guardian and CNN.

How we got here

Black, the co-founder of Apollo Global Management, employed Jeffrey Epstein as a wealth adviser and by his own account confided in him about personal matters, including a contentious extramarital affair, according to CBS News. He sat for a voluntary closed-door interview with the committee in June but walked out after refusing to answer questions about nondisclosure agreements, CNN reported. Comer issued the two subpoenas right after that walkout: one demanding the NDA documents, one ordering Black back for a sworn, videotaped deposition.

Emails released by the committee last year, cited by CBS News, show Epstein weighing in on Black's 2015 negotiations with a former Russian model he'd had a six-year affair with. Epstein suggested hiring "two highly respected former" law enforcement officers to deliver terms to her. Court filings show Black discussed that specific agreement with only two people: Epstein and a private investigator.

The lawsuit's argument

Black's attorneys argue the subpoenas go beyond what Congress is legally allowed to demand. Their letter to the committee, obtained by CNN, states plainly: "Congress is not entitled to subpoena documents from a private citizen on the inchoate hope that something useful might show up."

The lawsuit itself calls the NDA subpoena invalid because it seeks "private information that bears no legitimate connection to OGR's legislative purpose," and warns it would expose women who "have no known or public connection to Epstein" and never agreed to give up their confidentiality.

Attorney Susan Estrich put it more bluntly in a statement: "The Committee is on a fishing expedition that oversteps its authority. This is no longer about finding the truth about Epstein. It is about trying to destroy Mr. Black."

Congressional subpoena power isn't unlimited, and dragging private nondisclosure agreements involving unnamed third parties who have no connection to any crime into a public investigation raises real privacy questions, especially for people who never consented to being part of this story.

But the committee's counter-argument is that Black isn't just any private citizen with an unrelated NDA. Comer's own June follow-up made clear the panel wants to know whether Epstein himself was involved in negotiating those confidentiality agreements, not whether Black had an affair. The 2015 emails already show Epstein doing exactly that: drafting pressure tactics against the woman on Black's behalf.

Where the two sides stand

Comer, a Kentucky Republican, didn't announce a contempt vote Thursday. His statement instead said: "It's a shame Leon Black is hiding behind litigation rather than provide answers to the American people. I will speak with our members about next steps."

Ranking Democrat Robert Garcia of California went further, calling for contempt "immediately." Garcia stated Black "gave Jeffrey Epstein over $180 million over six years" and said Black "funded Epstein's abuse and trafficking of women," adding that "multiple women have also accused Black of sexual assault." Those are Garcia's characterizations, not findings from any court or the committee itself. Black has not been charged with a crime related to Epstein, and he has denied wrongdoing.

In opening remarks from his June appearance, shared by his legal team and cited by CNN, Black said he didn't know the extent of Epstein's crimes and denied ever abusing women or having sexual relations with minors.

What's actually unresolved

No judge has ruled on Black's lawsuit. No contempt citation has been voted on by the full committee or the House. Comer's own statement leaves that decision open, meaning the next concrete step is either a committee vote to hold Black in contempt or a federal judge's ruling on whether the subpoenas survive his legal challenge. Files released by the Justice Department reference Black repeatedly, according to The Independent, which means his name isn't going away from this investigation regardless of how the lawsuit turns out.