Coverage spread: 3 sources — 2 left · 1 center
Lean ratings via AllSides / Media Bias-Fact-Check. How this works.
Where they agree
- Leon Black sued the House Oversight Committee on September 3, 2026, and refused to appear for a scheduled deposition, prompting the panel to hold the session anyway with an empty chair for him.
- The subpoenas, issued in June after Black walked out of an earlier voluntary interview, sought both his testimony and nondisclosure agreements he was party to.
- Black’s attorney Susan Estrich called the effort a “fishing expedition” meant to “destroy Mr. Black,” while Chairman James Comer and ranking Democrat Robert Garcia both criticized Black’s refusal and floated contempt.
- Black paid Epstein $158 million and stepped down as Apollo CEO in March 2021 following disclosure of that relationship; he denies any knowledge of or involvement in Epstein’s crimes.
Where they differ
- CNBC and CBS News include Estrich’s detailed on-record denials (Black “never abused a woman,” was never blackmailed, never paid for access), while The Guardian’s live-blog format omits these specifics.
- CBS News uniquely details the 2015 Epstein-Black email exchange about handling the Russian model affair, giving concrete evidence of Epstein’s involvement in an NDA dispute.
- CNBC and CBS both quote Garcia’s harsher accusation that Black “funded Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of women,” a claim The Guardian’s excerpt does not include.
- The Guardian frames the story around public “outrage” and reaction, while CNBC and CBS focus more narrowly on the legal and procedural mechanics of the lawsuit and subpoenas.
Billionaire investor Leon Black, co-founder of Apollo Global Management and a former close associate of Jeffrey Epstein, sued the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on September 3, 2026, to block two subpoenas demanding his testimony and nondisclosure agreements. He skipped a scheduled deposition that morning, prompting the committee to hold the session anyway with an empty chair reserved for him, and Democrats immediately called for him to be held in contempt.
What exactly is the committee trying to get from Black?
The panel wants Black to sit for a sworn, videotaped deposition and to hand over multiple nondisclosure agreements he was party to. The subpoenas, issued June 26, came right after Black walked out of an earlier voluntary, closed-door interview with the committee when questioned about the NDAs. Committee Chairman James Comer, a Kentucky Republican, has said he specifically wants to know whether Epstein was involved in negotiating any of those agreements. Emails the committee released last year show Epstein did weigh in on at least one: a 2015 exchange in which Epstein advised Black on how to handle a contentious end to a six-year affair with a former Russian model, at one point suggesting Black hire former law-enforcement officers to deliver a message to her.
Why is Black refusing to comply?
Black’s lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, argues the subpoenas exceed the committee’s authority because they seek private information with no real connection to its legislative purpose. His attorney, Susan Estrich, said in a statement that the committee “is on a fishing expedition” and that the effort “is no longer about finding the truth about Epstein” but “about trying to destroy Mr. Black.” The suit also argues that turning over the NDAs would expose women who have no public connection to Epstein, bargained for confidentiality, and have refused to release it. Estrich maintains Black never abused a woman, was never involved with an underage woman, never paid Epstein for access to women, and was never blackmailed by him — and notes Black previously appeared voluntarily and already gave the committee one confidentiality agreement Epstein was aware of.
How did the committee react to Black’s no-show?
Comer called it “unacceptable” and said he was “very disappointed,” adding that Black is a crucial witness because he was a fee-paying Epstein client with several NDAs tied to the case. He said that if it were up to him, he’d hold Black in contempt immediately, but wants to consult the committee’s lawyers first so the move doesn’t jeopardize the panel’s ability to eventually obtain the nondisclosure agreements. Ranking Democrat Robert Garcia of California went further, accusing Black of having “funded Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of women” and saying Black made women sign strict NDAs “to keep them quiet.” Garcia and other Democrats pushed for immediate contempt proceedings, noting Black is now defying two separate congressional subpoenas.
What is Black’s history with Epstein?
Black employed Epstein as a wealth-management adviser for years and has described him as someone he confided in on personal matters. Black stepped down as Apollo’s CEO in March 2021, ahead of his original timeline, two months after the firm disclosed he had paid Epstein $158 million for financial and estate-planning services. Black has consistently denied any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes and denies wrongdoing himself.
What happens next?
The lawsuit sets up a court fight over how far Congress’s investigative subpoena power extends, particularly when it reaches into private agreements involving third parties who aren’t part of the Epstein case. Comer says he’ll discuss next steps with committee members, while the panel weighs whether and when to move on contempt. The broader investigation, which the committee says is examining how the federal government failed Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s victims for decades and how Epstein tried to buy influence with powerful people, continues regardless of the outcome with Black.
Sources
Featured photo by Vishwas Katti on Unsplash