The recently released files related to the investigation into late United States financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have highlighted concerns about the double standards in the US judicial system, which experts said is politicized and serves the interests of the privileged.

On Jan 30, the US Department of Justice declassified more than 3 million pages of documents, along with some 2,000 videos and 180,000 images, under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, but the document dump did not break significant ground about the long-running investigation of the financier or his ties to wealthy, powerful individuals.

While the act required the redaction of the names or personal identifying information about Epstein's underage victims, who numbered more than 1,000, it said no records could be "withheld, delayed, or redacted on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary".

However, US lawmakers who began reviewing the files on Monday said that some names have been deliberately censored. Representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat from Maryland, was among the Democratic and Republican lawmakers who examined the newly released Epstein files at a secure location.

"I saw the names of lots of people who were redacted for mysterious or baffling or inscrutable reasons," Raskin told reporters. "There are certainly lots of names of other people who were enablers and cooperators with Jeffrey Epstein that were just blanked out for no apparent reason."

Also on Monday, a former associate of Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, declined to answer questions from House lawmakers in a deposition. She, however, indicated that if US President Donald Trump were to grant her a pardon, she would be willing to testify that neither he nor former president Bill Clinton had done anything wrong in connection with Epstein.

He Yun, a researcher at a Belt and Road strategy institute of Tsinghua University, said the Epstein case lays bare deep structural flaws in the US judicial system, particularly the extent to which it can be influenced by wealth and entrenched privilege.

A 2008 plea agreement negotiated by then US attorney Alexander Acosta allowed Epstein to serve just 13 months in custody, with extensive work-release privileges during the day, an arrangement widely criticized as affording extraordinary leniency to a well-connected defendant.

"In high-profile cases, legal processes can be shaped by plea deals, political considerations and selective enforcement, while ordinary offenders convicted of similar crimes face far harsher penalties. The stark contrast underscores persistent concerns about double standards within the US judicial system when it comes to the privileged," He said.

The independence of the US judiciary has been further undermined by political rivalry, she said, noting that the Republican-controlled US Congress has issued subpoenas targeting prominent Democrats, such as Clinton, while Republican leaders and their associates have not faced comparable levels of scrutiny.

A CNN poll conducted in July last year found that half of US citizens are dissatisfied with the amount of information the federal government has released in the Epstein case.

Chen Hong, director of the East China Normal University's Asia Pacific Studies Centre in Shanghai, said this "erosion of trust is not confined to the judicial sphere, and points to deeper structural problems within the US system of governance".

"Tensions between the legislative and law enforcement branches have intensified institutional friction, further undermining public confidence in the credibility and coherence of the system as a whole," he said.

Chen noted that the declassified Epstein files reveal how his clout interfered with the judicial process, with the practice of replacing criminal prosecution with plea bargains and civil settlements exposing systemic safeguards for the privileged class, effectively reducing justice to a "negotiable commodity".

The case has directly or indirectly implicated many prominent figures in the West, laying bare the deep-seated moral decay among sections of the Western elite and its corrosive impact on the social order, Chen added.

He, from Tsinghua University, said that when the legal system fails to effectively restrain those in positions of power, "it sends a troubling message that wealth and influence can override the rule of law, thereby undermining the ethical norms upon which society depends".

Chen, from East China Normal University, noted that the Epstein case has attracted global attention for exposing how some among the Western elite are able to operate above the rule of law and evade accountability.

"It also serves as a stark reminder to countries around the world that, in international politics, power politics can at times override the international order centered around the United Nations Charter," he said.

Agencies contributed to this story.