The House late Tuesday voted 214–209 to reject a GOP resolution to formally reprimand V.I. Delegate Stacey Plaskett and remove her from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence — a vote that allowed her to keep her committee seat and effectively ended the censure attempt. Three Republicans broke with their party to vote against the measure, while three others voted present. The resolution stemmed from documents released last week by the Epstein estate and additional materials cited in national reporting, which revealed a set of February 2019 text messages sent during Michael Cohen’s testimony before the Oversight Committee. At the time, Cohen was serving as President Donald Trump’s personal attorney before later pleading guilty in multiple federal cases. Following the vote, Plaskett said in a media statement, “The House vote today affirmed what I have maintained from the beginning: the accusations behind this censure effort were rooted in partisanship, not facts. I am grateful that a majority of my colleagues recognized this for what it was and refused to allow Congress to be used as a stage for political retaliation. It is clear that President Trump and Republicans in Congress attempted to abuse their power to distract the country from their failure to release the Epstein files. For months, we have seen the President abuse his authority by turning the Justice Department into his own personal vendetta. That is true now with Epstein, as the President demands certain Democrats — and only Democrats — be investigated. This censure effort was part of that absurd and abusive campaign.”

In a call with the Source later, Plaskett added that she has continued to support the push to release any Epstein files – whether by the estate, Federal Bureau of Investigation, or others – in full.

“Jeffrey Epstein’s actions represent one of the most grotesque abuses of wealth, power, and privilege in modern memory. His conduct — proven through criminal charges, survivor testimony, and extensive investigations — was not merely immoral; it was predatory, exploitative, and this is the type of behavior that as an attorney, I have worked to fight against and I will continue to fight for the people of the Virgin Islands in my capacity as their representative,” she said. Reflecting on the broader implications of the vote, Plaskett noted several recent censure attempts in the House have targeted lawmakers of color — including multiple Black women — a pattern she and other Democrats argue reflects a concerning political trend. “This is a bigger fight than how this makes us look,” she said. “We are all in danger with this administration,” she added, pointing to what she described as increasingly aggressive tactics aimed at silencing dissenting voices, particularly in Black and brown communities.

The censure push against Plaskett quickly escalated on the House floor earlier Tuesday as lawmakers debated House Resolution 888, introduced by Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.). The move came after newly released records from the Epstein estate — part of a larger tranche of disclosures over the past week — revived scrutiny of Epstein’s network and communications.

National reporting, including by The Washington Post, noted that the documents show Epstein sending text messages during the widely watched 2019 Cohen hearing, though the records do not identify a recipient. Norman’s resolution nonetheless accuses Plaskett of “inappropriate coordination,” alleging she “received instructions on specific lines of questioning,” that Epstein “actively coached” her in real time, and that she maintained political and personal associations with him after his 2008 conviction. Democrats pushed back sharply, arguing that the resolution relies on unverified assumptions, ignores due process, and distorts the available messages. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the ranking member on the Oversight Committee, called the measure a “rush to judgment” and warned the House against censuring a member based solely on the timing of texts that have been taken out of context. Other Democratic lawmakers noted that the publicly released documents do not identify a recipient for Epstein’s messages and that national reporting shows only a fraction of Plaskett’s five-minute exchange with Cohen. They also pointed out that Plaskett returned Epstein’s campaign contributions in 2019 after learning the full extent of the federal investigation. The Democratic Party of the Virgin Islands also weighed in, issuing a statement late Tuesday night criticizing the move to censure Plaskett and urging fairness in the process. “The people of the U.S. Virgin Islands must not have their voice diminished through a process that abandons fairness and due process,” State Chair Carol M. Burke said, adding that Plaskett’s tenure has been marked by “steadfast advocacy, national leadership, and an unwavering commitment to the people of the Virgin Islands.”

Plaskett, meanwhile, delivered an extended defense on the House floor, telling colleagues she had “never sought advice from Epstein or anyone else on how to question a witness.” She said the texts sent during the widely watched 2019 Cohen hearing came in alongside dozens of messages from friends, constituents, and members of the public reacting in real time — and that Epstein’s name was not widely known at the time to be under renewed federal investigation. “Let me tell you something,” Plaskett said. “I don’t need to get advice on how to question anybody. I have been a lawyer for 30 years … I know how to seek information. I have sought information from confidential informants, from murderers, from other individuals, because I want the truth — not because I need them to tell me what to say.”

She emphasized that her record shows a long history of prosecuting sexual-abuse and trafficking cases. “I have consistently stood against sexual violence and the exploitation of women and children,” she said, adding that she donated Epstein’s contributions to women’s organizations once she learned of the scope of his crimes. Plaskett accused her critics of weaponizing a text exchange that “shows no participation, no assistance, no involvement in any illegal activity,” arguing the effort was “political theater” rather than a good-faith concern about the Epstein investigation. “This attempt at intimidation will pass,” she told the chamber. “We in the Virgin Islands do not back down from a fight … If you censure me, take away a committee, I will still do the work.”

The debate unfolded against the broader backdrop of renewed scrutiny over Epstein’s network and the simultaneous passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which directs the Justice Department to declassify portions of its investigative records and has now moved to Trump’s desk. The censure resolution, meanwhile, remains deeply contested — with Democrats arguing it lacks substantiation and Republicans insisting the released documents raise questions that merit formal action.

Meanwhile, in a separate development late Tuesday, the House Oversight Committee requested a broad set of Epstein-related documents from the Virgin Islands Justice Department. In a letter to Attorney General Gordon Rhea, Committee Chair Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) asked for records tied to the 2019 estate case, the territory’s 2020 civil action against Epstein’s companies, and the V.I. government’s 2023 settlement with JPMorgan. Comer said the committee is examining the federal government’s handling of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, as well as potential ethics concerns involving elected officials. The request also points to Epstein’s long-standing financial footprint in the territory — including tax incentives received by his companies and business ties with territorial officials — suggesting those local records could help inform the broader federal review. The committee asked for unredacted documents by Dec. 2 as part of what it described as an effort to shape future legislation on federal oversight and sex-trafficking enforcement.

The Virgin Islands Police Department on Monday announced a round of arrests tied to the growing wave of bomb threats at St. Thomas public schools, taking six minors into protective custody and warning that more charges are likely as investigators track what has become a persistent pattern disrupting classrooms across the district. The latest incidents were reported to the 911 Emergency Call Center on Nov. 17 and targeted Lockhart K-8 School and Charlotte Amalie High School, prompting immediate responses from police and school security. According to VIPD, detectives have identified “several persons of interest,” and interviews remain underway. The six minors detained so far face a range of charges, including false reporting, cyber harassment, bomb hoax, disturbance of the peace/threat, and conspiracy. The arrests follow a week of heightened unease across the St. Thomas–St. John district, as repeated threats forced multiple campus lockdowns, evacuations, and widespread anxiety among students, parents, and teachers. The Source has reported extensively on escalating security concerns this fall, including increased police presence at several campuses and the Education Department’s coordination with federal partners to monitor social-media-based threats. Monday’s arrests also come against the backdrop of a longer pattern stretching back several years. VIPD noted that similar cases in 2023 resulted in multiple juvenile arrests tied to threats against Seventh-day Adventist School and the former Addelita Cancryn Junior High School. In each instance, minors were charged with a combination of false reporting, cyber offenses, and hoax threats before being remanded to the Youth Rehabilitation Center. Police Commissioner Mario Brooks on Monday called the current spike “unacceptable,” stressing that the repeated hoax calls have drained emergency resources, caused panic, and diverted officers from other critical responsibilities. “Let me be perfectly clear: this behavior is not a prank. It is a crime,” Brooks said, adding that additional arrests are expected and urging parents to closely monitor their children’s phone use. “Saying ‘I did not know’ is not an excuse,” he warned. VIPD said it will continue working with the Education Department and federal law enforcement partners as investigations progress. In the meantime, officials urged families to speak with their children about the severity of false threats — and the real-world consequences they carry.

The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved the Epstein Files Transparency Act, voting 427–1 to require the Justice Department to declassify and release its records related to the federal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. The measure now heads to the Senate, where it will need 60 votes before advancing to the president’s desk. The vote came the same day the House introduced a resolution to censure V.I. Delegate Stacey Plaskett, following the latest batch of materials released by the House Oversight Committee. The Washington Post has reported that some of the documents include text messages sent by Epstein that appear to align with the timing of a 2019 congressional hearing involving testimony about then-President Donald Trump. The documents do not identify a recipient. The reporting linked the timing to questions Plaskett asked during the hearing; her office has said she received messages from “staff, constituents and the public at large — including from Epstein” that day and reiterated her long record on combating sexual abuse and human trafficking. Epstein, a convicted sex offender who maintained properties in multiple jurisdictions — including Little St. James in the U.S. Virgin Islands, where many of his crimes are alleged to have occurred — operated a trafficking network over several decades. His death in federal custody in 2019 left significant gaps in the public record and intensified longstanding calls for greater transparency. The political landscape around the disclosure effort has shifted in recent days. After last week’s release of thousands of pages of Epstein-related documents, President Donald Trump expressed support for the transparency bill, reversing earlier skepticism. National reporting indicates he directed former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, now serving in his administration, to review issues raised in the documents; Bondi referred that review to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. Trump has since said he would sign the measure if it reaches his desk. The lone vote against the bill came from Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.), who said he objected to the legislation’s current scope. In a statement released after the vote, Higgins argued that the bill “reveals and injures thousands of innocent people” by broadly opening investigative files, and he expressed concern about privacy protections for victims, witnesses, and others referenced in the records. He said he would support the bill if the Senate amends it to address those concerns. If the legislation clears the Senate’s 60-vote threshold, it would move to the president for consideration. A presidential veto would require two-thirds majorities in both chambers to override. Some legal observers note that a president can independently direct the Justice Department to release certain records, though others caution that materials tied to active or sealed investigations may remain protected. For now, Tuesday’s actions provide the clearest public record to date of where lawmakers stand on the release of information connected to Epstein — a case that continues to carry significant weight in the U.S. Virgin Islands and nationally.