Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer plans to force a vote on a measure that could allow lawmakers to jump-start litigation against the Trump administration for failing to comply with the new law requiring the full release of the Jeffrey Epstein files.

“The law Congress passed is crystal clear: release the Epstein files in full so Americans can see the truth,” the New York Democrat said in a statement Monday. “Instead, the Trump Department of Justice dumped redactions and withheld the evidence — that breaks the law. Today, I am introducing a resolution to force the Senate to take legal action and compel this administration to comply.”

The resolution would establish “authority to initiate litigation for actions by the President and Department of Justice officials inconsistent with their duties under the laws of the United States.”

It’s unlikely that enough Republicans would join Democrats in supporting the measure, but Schumer intends to put his colleagues on the spot in January, bringing the resolution to the floor when the Senate reconvenes after the holiday recess.

It follows Friday’s long-awaited rollout of materials from the Justice Department in its case against the late, convicted sex offender. That day, Dec. 19, marked the legislation’s deadline for public disclosure — but DOJ has said it would instead slowly release materials over the course of weeks, sparking bipartisan outrage.

The White House on Monday pointed to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s recent interview with NBC News, in which he claimed his department was doing everything in its power to comply with the law.

Asked about potential threats about impeachment proceedings, contempt or criminal referrals, Blanche responded: “Bring it on.”

The White House referred further comment to the Justice Department. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Congress passed legislation last month granting the Justice Department 30 days to publicly release its materials. The bill provided few exceptions for when files could obtain redactions — primarily in instances where DOJ wanted to protect the identities of Epstein’s victims.

The White House and congressional GOP leadership had led a long campaign to thwart passage the bill. However, it ultimately advanced unanimously in the Senate and with only one nay vote in the House: Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.), who argued it could jeopardize the privacy of Epstein’s victims and others.

After an initial dump of materials Friday and Saturday, Democrats were quick to blast the administration for failing to release the Epstein files in full and accused the administration of unlawfully redacting information.

Relatively little new information was included in the batches of materials that have been released so far.

Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) — who championed the legislation and led the effort to force a floor vote in the House to release the files — suggested they would urge the House to invoke its long-dormant power to hold Attorney General Pam Bondi in inherent contempt of Congress for her agency’s failure to comply with the law.

On Monday, Khanna posted on X that he, Massie and Epstein’s accusers are eager to see the draft indictment, interviews in which witnesses name other men who might have perpetuated sex crimes, emails from Epstein’s computer and the Epstein prosecution memo.

Congress has adjourned for the holidays having made no tangible progress toward funding the government ahead of a shutdown looming less than six weeks away.

The most conspicuous sign that Congress faces real obstacles before the Jan. 30 funding deadline came late Thursday, when Senate leaders gave up on passing a spending package and sent members home for two weeks, despite working for more than a month to appease senators who had objections.

But the impediments to reaching a deal that can pass both chambers are more extensive, starting with the fact that Republicans and Democrats on both ends of the Capitol have yet to start negotiating the details of the nine pending funding bills. The lack of bipartisan offer-trading is raising the likelihood of another short-term punt — or another shutdown.

“We wasted a lot of time because the Senate’s not negotiating yet,” House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said in an interview last week. “When they’re ready to negotiate, we can move fast.”

Cole and his counterpart, Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine), just reached an agreement over the weekend on overall totals for the remaining spending bills Congress needs to pass. Lawmakers already passed three as part of the package that ended the shutdown last month — funding veterans and agriculture agencies, federal food aid and the Food and Drug Administration, along with Congress itself, through Sept. 30.

For more than a month Cole and Collins had been trying to bridge differences on key numbers while Senate leaders tried to advance a funding package that reflects consensus from only their side of the Capitol. Last week’s heave failed, but senators expect to try again in early January.

“We have different dynamics in our caucuses that we need to deal with,” Collins said this month as she left a meeting with Cole.

Democrats have been growing impatient. “They wasted all that time during the summer,” said Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the House’s top Democratic appropriator, about House Republicans spending the better part of this year crafting partisan funding bills.

Then Democrats had to wait for their GOP counterparts to strike the “majority to majority” deal on funding totals that finally arrived Saturday.

“Democrats are prepared. We’re ready to move. Let’s go,” DeLauro said.

Even if top appropriators can manage to agree on the nine remaining funding bills, other thorny dynamics threaten to complicate final passage in each chamber. The pitfalls include the mismatch between what appropriators want to spend and the demands of House fiscal hawks seeking flat funding for agencies — as well as the fact that Democrats will need to help pass any spending bills in the Senate, as they acutely illustrated with this fall’s record 43-day shutdown.

The totals top Republican appropriators just agreed upon are not public. But Cole said the deal will ensure overall funding would be below the level laid out in the stopgap funding patch enacted last month.

Maryland Rep. Andy Harris, chair of the House Freedom Caucus and a top Republican appropriator, said last week that he wants funding for the Pentagon and the largest nondefense agencies to be “no more than what was enacted” for the fiscal year that ended in September.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) has the same idea: “I don’t want any spending higher than current-level spending,” he said. “If they’re busting the current levels, then they’re going to have to demonstrate to me why.”

If House hard-liners aren’t appeased when the funding bills come together, they could start making threats to Speaker Mike Johnson and other GOP leaders, who already are on the outs with House Republicans over their handling of health care assistance this month.

“You can expect the smoke to start coming up from over that hill and that hill and that hill,” said Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Nev.), who chairs the Homeland Security spending panel. “And there might even be some open flame.”

Amodei said some of his colleagues are openly talking about the potential for another shutdown. But many others think it is more likely that Congress is headed for another punt at current funding levels for the remaining nine bills.

Last week, Johnson told his conference in a closed-door meeting that he wants to pass those bills by the Jan. 30 deadline — a goal that many in the GOP ranks consider aspirational at best. One House Republican granted anonymity to describe the private meeting said he turned to one of his colleagues and whispered, “I wouldn’t bet on that on Polymarket,” referring to an online prediction market.

Senate leaders have their own conflicting demands to manage. Fiscal conservatives repeatedly objected to starting debate on a five-bill funding package in recent weeks, citing opposition to earmarks as they also sought promises related to other legislation.

But it was Democrats who blocked movement in the final days before the Senate adjourned Thursday. One late-breaking demand by Colorado’s senators was to reverse the White House’s move last week to dismantle a federal center in the state that supports research in climate and weather science.

Still, following the acrimony of the shutdown this fall, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Majority Leader John Thune are at least projecting a unified front on government funding ahead of the January deadline.

“Both Thune and I are in agreement that we’re going to work through the process and get the appropriations bills done,” Schumer told reporters late Thursday after Senate leaders decided to adjourn without passing the funding package.

Since top Republican appropriators reached an agreement on overall totals after Congress adjourned, lawmakers hope some negotiating can be done before they return to town Jan. 5.

“Staff has been instructed to — whatever they’re doing — take their laptops with them,” DeLauro said.

When Congress reconvenes, both chambers are only scheduled to be in session for three weeks before the shutdown deadline — with the House slated to be out of session the week immediately before.

Texas Rep. Tony Gonzales, a Republican appropriator, said he was hopeful his party’s leaders would keep lawmakers in town to pass any deal that might come together.

“This is people’s political livelihood on the line,” he said. “We’ve got to get this done. Nobody leaves.”

Nicholas Wu contributed to this report.

As Republicans in his state’s legislature considered joining a Donald Trump-backed effort to redraw congressional maps in the GOP’s favor, Rep. Frank Mrvan kept quiet.

The new lines would have doomed the low-key Democrat representing Indiana’s northwest corner, but only now — after Republicans in the state Senate roundly rejected the Trump push — is he speaking out with a message for both parties: It’s time to lay down arms on redistricting.

“I do not believe all-blue and all-red states benefit anyone,” Mrvan said in an interview. “We need to have unifying factors that bring our country together again, like lowering health care costs and being able to make sure that when someone goes to a grocery store, they can afford beef and provide for their families and have safe communities. I don’t know if it’s a priority to manipulate maps for one party or the other to be in the majority.”

While Indiana’s attempt at mid-decade redistricting is now in the rearview mirror, other states have not ruled it out. The GOP-controlled Florida legislature is now exploring new maps, but so are the Democratic majorities in Maryland and Virginia. Both parties are also closely watching a forthcoming Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights Act that could prompt new maps in southern states.

After Trump kicked off the mid-cycle redistricting push by prodding Texas Republicans to draw new lines that could oust as many as five Democrats in 2026, many House lawmakers aired private concerns about the disruptive and divisive process that was not guaranteed to net GOP seats in the midterms. Many fewer spoke out publicly, given fear of retribution from Trump.

Now a growing number of Democrats are eager to exact revenge. California Gov. Gavin Newsom pushed through a ballot measure that will allow Democrats to offset the Texas losses, but some are eager for more — with Mrvan among the few who have been willing to say that would be a bad idea.

Rep. André Carson, the other Indiana Democrat whose district was at grave risk in a redistricting scenario, defended the blue states that are still looking to act, saying it was “all a reaction to what happened in Texas.”

“My hope is that this will inspire other legislative bodies to push back against Donald Trump’s very extremist agenda that is helping himself but hurting Americans,” Carson said. Pressed on blue-state redistricting, he said those legislatures “are going to have to make that decision on their own.”

Carson and Mrvan among a dwindling number of midwestern Democrats in an increasingly coastal caucus who just survived a political near-death experience. The fact is, they might have only gotten a temporary reprieve: Post-census redistricting just six years away could put them in peril once again.

Mrvan has already been targeted by national Republicans, winning a costly 2022 race by about 6 points. But he described working quietly behind the scenes to convince statehouse leaders that drawing him out of his seat would be a bad idea.

The 31-19 final vote killing the proposal didn’t have anything to do with pressure from him, Mrvan emphasized, but he had been in touch with GOP state senators who had been victims of harassment including “swatting” incidents to check on their safety.

“I think it was very clear they were going to vote their conscience and what they believed in, and there is no inside track that they were sharing with me the process and what was going on,” he said — while also personally thanking four GOP state senators in his district who opposed the redraw “for their act of courage and for unifying our state.”

One message Mrvan did send, he said, was that “redistricting would not benefit the state of Indiana.” As the only Hoosier on the powerful House Appropriations Committee, he argued, his ouster would “take away that leverage” in Congress on major state projects requiring bipartisan cooperation.

He cited recent indications from the owners of the NFL’s Chicago Bears that they could relocate the team from its longtime lakefront stadium just over the state line to Mrvan’s district. “We’re already gathering in a bipartisan way to say we welcome the Bears,” he said.

Carson said he, too, took a soft-touch approach — remaining in communication with GOP members of the congressional delegation and state legislators but allowing them “the freedom and the sovereignty that they have to make decisions, because it is their body.”

“But all hands were on deck,” Carson added.

Both Democrats also said they were in touch with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries starting over the summer as the redistricting push began. Carson recalled that Jeffries pledged support and resources and was “sensitive” to the dynamics of the fight as a former state legislator.

In the end, Carson said, a respectful approach and Indiana’s distinctly midwestern political culture won out over national browbeating.

“I’ve said all along, Hoosiers do things very differently,” he said. “The majority of Hoosiers did not agree with this new unfair map, and Hoosiers made sure the statehouse knew it.”