Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) sharply criticized Ghislaine Maxwell’s attorney over the handling of Maxwell’s potential testimony before Congress, framing her comments as a defense of constitutional rights for victims. The confrontation unfolded after Maxwell’s lawyer, David Oscar Markus, argued that invoking constitutional protections should not be seen as obstruction and that personal attacks on counsel were inappropriate.
Luna’s remarks escalated a public exchange on social media, in which she accused Markus of representing a client who is “actively obstructing a congressional investigation” and only willing to testify “after claiming to be a victim” if granted immunity. “This is not a personal attack. It’s what you’re doing. You’re getting paid to defend a pedophile and a trafficker. That is the truth. I’m sorry if you don’t like it,” Luna said in a direct response to Markus. She further questioned the implications for the rights of potential victims, asking, “What about the constitutional rights of the children?”
Your client is actively obstructing a congressional investigation and only willing to testify (after claiming to be a victim) if she gets immunity.
— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) February 9, 2026
You are getting paid to protect a pedophile and trafficker. Who is really sad here? https://t.co/BcSQkv0OtC
The exchange continued when Luna called out Maxwell’s legal strategy, saying, “Your client is looking for immunity for crimes in exchange for testimony where she could give us names. You may be able to twist facts in court to sway jurors but those games don’t work with us.” Markus responded by emphasizing that invoking a constitutional right is not obstruction and described Luna’s comments as “beneath the office” of a congresswoman.
This is not a personal attack. It’s what you’re doing. You’re getting paid to defend a pedophile and a trafficker. That is the truth. I’m sorry if you don’t like it.
— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) February 9, 2026
What about the constitutional rights of the children? Your client is looking for immunity for crimes in exchange… https://t.co/CLcSSkL2Mh
Luna’s statements reflect ongoing tension surrounding congressional efforts to investigate figures connected to Jeffrey Epstein’s trafficking network. Maxwell, convicted in 2021 of sex trafficking and related charges, has been at the center of debates over immunity deals in exchange for cooperation with government investigations. Lawmakers and legal experts have closely watched these discussions, weighing the balance between encouraging testimony and ensuring accountability for past crimes.
The confrontation highlights the broader scrutiny facing attorneys representing high-profile defendants in sensitive cases. While legal counsel is constitutionally protected, Luna’s comments underscore the political and moral pressure surrounding Maxwell’s potential cooperation with congressional investigations. By framing the issue around the rights of victims and the integrity of ongoing inquiries, Luna positioned herself as advocating for congressional oversight and accountability in cases involving sexual abuse and trafficking.
The exchange has drawn attention for its blunt tone and pointed criticisms, marking a rare moment where a sitting member of Congress publicly called out legal counsel over the defense of a convicted trafficker. It also raises questions about the interplay between legal protections, congressional authority, and public accountability in high-profile criminal cases.
