SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE — CONFIRMATION HEARING Alexander Acosta — Nominee for Secretary of Labor March 22, 2017
During Alexander Acosta's confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee for the position of U.S. Secretary of Labor, several senators questioned him about his role as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida in negotiating the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement with Jeffrey Epstein. The exchanges provided the most detailed public accounting of Acosta's rationale prior to the case's reemergence in 2018-2019.
BACKGROUND: Acosta served as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida from 2005 to 2009. During this period, his office negotiated and executed the NPA that allowed Epstein to avoid federal charges in exchange for a guilty plea to a single Florida state charge. By the time of the 2017 confirmation hearing, the NPA had already been the subject of significant criticism from victims' advocates and legal commentators, though it had not yet received the intense national scrutiny that would follow Julie K. Brown's 2018 Miami Herald investigation.
KEY EXCHANGES:
Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) pressed Acosta on the decision to allow Epstein to plead to a state charge rather than pursuing federal prosecution. Acosta responded that his office's involvement was what compelled Epstein to plead guilty and register as a sex offender, outcomes that the state investigation alone had not achieved. He stated that without the threat of federal prosecution, Epstein might have faced no consequences at all.
Senator Al Franken (D-MN) questioned Acosta about the breadth of the immunity provision in the NPA, specifically the grant of immunity to unnamed co-conspirators. Acosta acknowledged the provision but argued that the primary objective was to secure a guilty plea and sex offender registration for Epstein. He stated that the co-conspirator immunity was part of a negotiated package and that the alternative — going to trial with potentially reluctant witnesses — carried significant risk.
Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) asked whether Acosta believed the sentence was proportionate to the crimes alleged. Acosta stated that he believed the plea outcome, while not perfect, was the best available resolution given the circumstances. He noted the challenges of the case, including the age of the victims, the passage of time, and the reluctance of some witnesses to testify.
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) raised the failure to notify victims as required by the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Acosta expressed regret that the process had not been more transparent to victims and acknowledged that victim notification was an important obligation.
ACOSTA'S DEFENSE OF THE NPA: Throughout the hearing, Acosta presented a consistent narrative: that the federal investigation was what forced Epstein to accept criminal liability; that the state case alone would likely have resulted in no conviction; and that the NPA, despite its limitations, achieved meaningful accountability through the guilty plea and sex offender registration.
He also referenced the strength of Epstein's legal defense team — including Alan Dershowitz, Ken Starr, Jay Lefkowitz, and others — as a factor in the negotiation dynamic. He suggested that the resources available to the defense created significant litigation risk for the government.
CONFIRMATION OUTCOME: The Judiciary Committee advanced Acosta's nomination, and the full Senate confirmed him as Secretary of Labor on April 27, 2017, by a vote of 60-38. Several senators who voted to confirm later stated that they believed Acosta's answers regarding the Epstein case were forthcoming, though the case had not yet reached the level of national prominence it would achieve in 2018-2019.
SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENTS: When the Epstein case reemerged following Brown's reporting and the 2019 CVRA ruling, Acosta held a press conference on July 10, 2019, defending his handling of the NPA. Three days later, on July 12, 2019, he resigned as Secretary of Labor under intense political pressure. His confirmation hearing testimony became part of the historical record of the institutional response to the Epstein case.
SIGNIFICANCE: The confirmation hearing excerpts document the first time Acosta was required to defend his handling of the Epstein plea deal in a formal, public setting. The exchanges revealed the core of his defense — that federal intervention compelled accountability that would not otherwise have occurred — while also highlighting the questions about victim notification, co-conspirator immunity, and sentencing proportionality that would later dominate public discourse about the case.