Ghislaine Maxwell faces exhaustion of legal appeals as pardon speculation persists

Ghislaine Maxwell seems to be all but guaranteed to have run out of legal avenues to challenge her conviction for her involvement in Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse of girls and young women with perhaps her lingering hopes of freedom resting on a pardon from the Trump administration.

Paul Engelmayer, a Manhattan federal court judge, last week rejected Maxwell’s contention that her constitutional rights were violated at trial and sentencing for her crimes. “Maxwell’s claims are all meritless and all or almost all are frivolous,” Engelmayer wrote in his ruling on the former British socialite’s legal gambit.

Engelmayer also rejected Maxwell’s claim that new evidence, which she said came to light during Epstein Files Transparency Act disclosures, did not support her allegations of constitutional violations. “On the contrary, to the extent it is relevant, far from exculpating her, it incriminates her or reinforces the correctness of the legal rulings,” he ruled.

Maxwell’s family said in a statement that Engelmayer’s ruling was “marked by a tone of sarcasm and disdain that, in our view, undermines the appearance of impartiality and invites scrutiny of the judge’s conduct”. They also said Maxwell “will continue to pursue every available legal avenue” for relief.

Legal veterans said, however, that Maxwell had virtually exhausted all her court-based routes. With Maxwell apparently running out of legal pathways, many have wondered whether Donald Trump will at some point deliver a Hail Mary – a presidential pardon.

“She’s exhausted her direct appeals. Now she’s trying to collaterally attack the conviction, which is very difficult to do,” said Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor who founded the law firm West Coast Trial Lawyers.

“I don’t know what world she lives in,” Rahmani also said. “Her only chance of ever seeing the light of day before her sentence runs is a presidential pardon.”

Rahmani explained Maxwell’s recent rejected request was different from her supreme court effort – which was based on claims that a decades-old non-prosecution agreement with south Florida federal authorities shielded her from prosecution. The supreme court bid failed when the justices declined to review that appeal.

Maxwell could ask the second circuit court of appeals to review Engelmayer’s ruling, but that is a request, not a surefire opportunity to be heard, said Mark Chutkow, a former federal prosecutor now practicing white-collar defense at the firm Dykema.

“Ordinarily, you either have to get a certificate of appealability from the trial court that denies your motion or your petition, or you can get it from the appellate court,” he said, noting Engelmayer did not grant such a certificate. “I would assume what she’s going to do is seek a certificate of appealability [from] the second circuit.”

The second circuit, however, will see Engelmayer’s decision and his denial of this certificate. “It seems unlikely that she is going to get a certificate of appealability from the second circuit court of appeals meaning that in essence, her legal avenues are going to be dead,” Chutkow said

“This decision should bring Ghislaine Maxwell’s campaign to escape accountability to a final close. A jury heard the evidence and convicted her. The court of appeals affirmed her conviction. The supreme court declined to intervene,” said Spencer Kuvin, an attorney at Goldlaw who has represented dozens of Epstein survivors. “Now, after thoroughly reviewing her latest claims, Judge Engelmayer has found that the evidence of her guilt was overwhelming and that her arguments were largely frivolous, procedurally barred, and based upon speculation, distortions and outright falsehoods.”

Given that Engelmayer’s ruling virtually shuts the door on future efforts per longtime attorneys, attention has once again shifted to a presidential pardon or commutation from Trump, who has been saddled with ongoing Epstein and Maxwell controversies since taking office again.

‘Politically, a pardon would be catastrophic’

Trump vowed while campaigning that his administration would release all Epstein documents, but his justice department repeatedly missed congressionally mandated disclosure deadlines, and some allege that some files remain secret. Trump, who socialized with Epstein before the latter’s Florida state court soliciting conviction, has maintained that he never engaged in inappropriate conduct.

The White House, when asked for comment on the pardon issue, pointed to two statements. When Trump was asked if he had ruled out a pardon, he said: “I haven’t even thought about it, I mean, I haven’t thought about it for months.”

“Maybe I haven’t thought about it at all,” Trump also said. “But I don’t talk about that. I don’t rule it in or out, I don’t even think about it.”

“Politically, I think it would be catastrophic,” said Brittany Martinez, a Republican strategist who is the executive director of Principles First. “You run on releasing the Epstein files. Then when documents are released, they’re limited and heavily redacted. Then you turn around and call the entire controversy a hoax. And after all of that, you pardon Jeffrey Epstein’s closest associate? While claiming to be the president who protects women and children?

“That would be incredibly difficult to defend,” she added.

Rahmani explained that there is a formal pardon process. A request would go to the justice department’s pardon attorney who, in turn, makes a recommendation. That said, “the president sort of marches to the beat of his own drum,” Rahmani said – Trump could just grant it.

“There is a very, very, very slim chance it happens at all,” Rahmani added. If it did, however, Rahmani said he would expect it to happen when Trump’s presidency wraps, not before the midterms.

“Even though the president is very unpredictable, I just can’t see it … It would be career suicide. But again, he obviously doesn’t care.”

Maxwell’s family said legal routes must be exhausted before making a pardon application. They said to the best of their knowledge, there isn’t an application to the Trump administration.

For advocates, presidential clemency would deal an immense blow to survivors.

Lauren Hersh, a former prosecutor who is the CEO of the non-profit World Without Exploitation, said: “After listening to so many survivors and hearing the devastating harm caused by Ghislaine Maxwell, I can’t imagine anybody would give the idea of a pardon a moment’s thought. It would be totally egregious.”

Asked about a pardon, Thomas Massie, a Republican Kentucky congressman who co-sponsored the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act, said in a statement: “I’m adamantly opposed to it. [Todd] Blanche already inexplicably and inappropriately moved her to a country club prison with no new information or indictments of coconspirators.”

Julie Roginsky, who filed sexual harassment lawsuits against Roger Ailes, the former Fox News CEO, and co-founded the survivors advocacy non-profit Lift Our Voices, said an act of clemency would be a “monumental slap in the face” for survivors. But she did not rule it out.

“She already got a sweetheart deal by being moved not just into Club Fed, but by being given privileges that nobody else in her position would be given,” Roginsky said, referring to Maxwell’s controversial transfer to a low-security prison.

Roginsky also pointed to Blanche’s interview of Maxwell, which the now attorney general conducted while he was the justice department’s second-ranking official. “I think we already understand that the fix is in for her, and I don’t know whether she had some sort of guarantee that once the president is on his way out, as one of his last acts of commutation, he will commute her sentence or just give her a full pardon,” Roginsky said.

“Nothing would surprise me.”