Senate Republicans on Wednesday narrowly voted to table an amendment that would have required the Justice Department to release all files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, after Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) used a procedural maneuver that caught the GOP off guard and left Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) visibly frustrated.
The 51–49 tally underscored internal Republican divisions over whether to force disclosure of the Epstein records, even as calls for transparency grow louder among MAGA-aligned voters, The Hill reported.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a rising conservative figure, and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a leading libertarian voice, broke with party leadership by voting against tabling the Epstein amendment.
“This has been my consistent position,” Hawley told reporters after voting. “My position has long been I think we ought to release those files and trust the American people, just like we did with the MLK files and the JFK files. I think this is a similar deal.”
Hawley pointed out that former President Trump recently called on the attorney general to release all non-classified Epstein files. Thune, meanwhile, was forced to allow a Senate vote on the matter — an outcome House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has worked to block in his chamber.
Thune’s only alternative would have been to pull the annual defense authorization bill, a key Republican priority, from the floor, The Hill reported.
Earlier Wednesday, senior GOP senators had expressed confidence they could muster the votes to table Schumer’s amendment directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to release the files.
“We’re going to table it,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said of Schumer’s amendment as he left the weekly chairmen’s meeting on Capitol Hill.
Several Republican lawmakers initially signaled they were undecided, citing the need for greater “transparency” surrounding Epstein’s crimes.
“We’ll see how it goes. We need to have a discussion about it but I think transparency is always good,” Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), an Armed Services Committee member who is retiring next year, told The Hill.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said he would have supported Schumer’s amendment if it stood a realistic chance of becoming law but noted GOP leaders were almost certain to remove it before the bill’s final passage.
“If there was an amendment on the floor that would have the force of law, I’d vote for it in a heartbeat,” he said.
The dispute over the Epstein files now threatens to complicate negotiations on other amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act.
Thune appeared frustrated Wednesday after Schumer unexpectedly introduced his proposal directing the Justice Department to release all Epstein-related records, The Hill noted.
“It’s a political stunt and we’ll dispose of it,” the Senate Majority Leader told reporters.
Schumer argued the vote would reveal whether Republicans are serious about making Epstein-related records public, including documents that could implicate other powerful figures tied to the sexual abuse of minors.
“If Republicans vote no, they’ll be saying to the American people you should not see the Epstein files. I ask my Republican colleagues, after all those years you spent calling for accountability, for transparency, for getting to the bottom of these awful crimes, why won’t you vote yes?” Schumer said on the floor.
Notably, Schumer didn’t mention Epstein or the need for more “transparency” during the Biden years or when he was the Senate majority leader, nor did any other Democrat.
The GOP leader had been negotiating amendment votes on the must-pass defense bill when Schumer bypassed the process and introduced his amendment, briefly seizing control of the Senate floor.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) openly questioned why GOP leaders allowed a spot on the legislative “tree” to remain open so that Schumer could file his amendment.
“I don’t know why we didn’t have the tree filled. You can fill the tree and always unfill it later,” he told The Hill. “I don’t know why we left the spot open on the tree. But we did and Schumer jumped on it like wet on water.”
“Carrie Underwood and Her Husband Join in Heart-Wrenching Tribute at Charlie Kirk’s Memorial — As His Father Collapses Crying ‘Give Me Back My Son, He’s Only 31,’ the Tearful Moment That Has Shattered Millions Around the World and Left America Holding Its Breath”
Phoenix, AZ — The air outside Turning Point USA’s national headquarters was thick with grief, flickering candlelight, and the scent of freshly laid flowers. What was meant to be a simple memorial for conservative commentator Charlie Kirk turned into a heart-wrenching tableau of raw emotion that left thousands in stunned silence.
Charlie Kirk’s father, overcome by grief, collapsed to his knees, clutching a framed photo of his 31-year-old son. In a voice breaking with unimaginable pain, he cried aloud: “Give me back my boy… he’s only 31!”
The plea hung in the air, echoing through the small crowd that had gathered to mourn. Strangers held each other, many openly sobbing, as the father’s anguish became a collective grief.
Into that silence stepped Carrie Underwood and her husband, their expressions heavy with sorrow. Trembling voices lifted in a haunting rendition of Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah.” Each note was charged with mourning, weaving a thread of solace through the sea of grief-stricken attendees. Witnesses described the moment as surreal: the music seemed to both honor Charlie’s life and give the father’s heartbreak a voice that everyone could hear.
Fans and passersby joined in laying flowers, candles, and handwritten notes beneath the temporary shrine, creating a tapestry of remembrance and solidarity. The crowd swelled quietly, people offering embraces and whispered words of comfort. Cameras captured the scene in detail — from the tears streaking down Carrie Underwood’s face to the small gestures of support between strangers who had never met.
Social media quickly erupted with clips of the event, spreading across the country within hours. Millions watched as the performance and the father’s emotional collapse became a shared moment of mourning, a reminder of the fragility of life and the universality of loss. Comments poured in from all corners: “I haven’t cried like this in years,” one viewer wrote. Another said, “You could feel the weight of a nation’s sorrow in that moment.”
The tribute, though deeply personal, transcended politics. For a few fleeting hours, Charlie Kirk’s life — and the love and grief surrounding it — became a shared story that touched hearts far beyond Phoenix. Carrie Underwood and her husband’s performance was more than a song; it was a balm for a shattered family, a community, and a nation grappling with sudden, senseless loss.
As the crowd slowly dispersed, candles still flickering in the cool evening air, one thing was clear: the memory of this night — the music, the tears, and the father’s desperate plea — would linger long in the hearts of all who witnessed it.