Bank of America Must Face Sex Trafficking Claims Tied to Jeffrey Epstein, Judge Rules
A federal judge has ruled that Bank of America must face key claims in a class action lawsuit accusing the bank of knowingly benefiting from Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking by continuing to provide financial services to him. The decision allows two claims under federal anti-trafficking law to proceed while dismissing others, narrowing the scope of the case but keeping it active.
U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff issued the ruling Thursday in Manhattan. In the same order, the court dismissed all claims against Bank of New York Mellon, ending the lawsuit against that institution at this stage. Judge Rakoff said he will issue a written opinion by February 13 explaining the basis for his decision.
The lawsuit was filed in October by a Florida woman identified as Jane Doe on behalf of herself and other women who accuse Epstein of sexual abuse. The complaint alleges that despite widespread public awareness of Epstein’s misconduct, major financial institutions continued doing business with him until his arrest in 2019 because those relationships remained profitable.
Judge Rakoff ruled that the accusers may pursue claims that Bank of America knowingly benefited from Epstein’s sex trafficking and that it obstructed enforcement of the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act. The court dismissed four other claims, including allegations that the bank directly participated in or aided Epstein’s sex trafficking and that it negligently failed to protect victims by continuing to offer specialized banking services.
The Trafficking Victims Protection Act allows victims of trafficking to bring civil claims not only against traffickers themselves, but also against individuals or businesses that knowingly benefit from a trafficking venture. The law focuses on whether an entity profited from the venture while aware of facts suggesting trafficking, even if it did not directly commit or assist the abuse. In cases involving financial institutions, courts examine whether banking services continued despite warning signs tied to a client’s conduct.
The judge found that the accusers plausibly alleged that Bank of America benefited financially from its relationship with Epstein while knowing facts that should have raised concerns about his activities. That determination allows the claims to proceed into discovery and trial, where evidence can be examined and tested.
By contrast, the court concluded that the allegations against Bank of New York Mellon did not meet the legal standard required to sustain similar claims. While the lawsuit accused the custodial bank of processing large volumes of wire transfers for Epstein, the judge found the complaint did not sufficiently establish that the bank knowingly benefited from trafficking as required under federal law. All claims against that bank were dismissed.
The lawsuit also includes a claim that Bank of America obstructed enforcement of the anti-trafficking law. In this context, obstruction refers to conduct that allegedly interferes with efforts to identify, report, or stop trafficking activity. The accusers argue that the bank failed to act despite red flags associated with Epstein’s accounts, including the movement of substantial sums of money. Bank of America argued that the claim failed because it did not identify a specific law enforcement investigation that was obstructed. The judge rejected that argument at this stage.
Several allegations did not survive the ruling. Judge Rakoff dismissed claims asserting that Bank of America directly participated in Epstein’s sex trafficking or that it owed and breached a general duty to protect victims. Those claims required a higher showing of direct involvement or legal responsibility, which the court found was not supported by the allegations as pleaded.
Both banks denied wrongdoing. Bank of America said it was pleased that the court narrowed the case and stated that it looks forward to a full review of the facts. Bank of New York Mellon said the dismissal reinforces that it had no involvement in Epstein’s crimes. Lawyers for Jane Doe said they plan to appeal the dismissal of the claims against Bank of New York Mellon.
The case follows earlier settlements involving Epstein’s financial institutions. In 2023, lawyers for Epstein accusers reached settlements totaling $365 million with JPMorgan Chase and Deutsche Bank, two banks that previously handled Epstein’s accounts. Neither bank admitted wrongdoing, and the settlements were approved by the same court.
Epstein’s criminal prosecution ended without a verdict after he died in federal custody in 2019, leaving civil litigation as the primary avenue for accusers to pursue claims against third parties alleged to have enabled his activities.
A trial is scheduled for May 11.
