Jane Doe 1 v. United States is a landmark federal lawsuit filed by victims of Jeffrey Epstein, specifically Jane Doe 1 (later joined by Jane Doe 2), challenging the U.S. government's 2008 non-prosecution agreement with Epstein as a violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), 18 U.S.C. § 3771. The case was initiated pro bono by attorneys Bradley J. Edwards and Paul Cassell in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on July 7, 2008 (Case No. 9:08-cv-80736). It alleged that federal prosecutors, including those from the Southern District of Florida, failed to notify victims of their rights, such as the right to confer with prosecutors and be treated with fairness, before entering the controversial plea deal that allowed Epstein to serve just 13 months in jail despite allegations of sex trafficking minors. The lawsuit sought to vacate the agreement and hold the government accountable for disregarding victims' statutory protections.

The case achieved significant legal victories, including a 2011 ruling that CVRA rights could apply even before formal charges are filed (Does 1 and 2 v. United States, 817 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (S.D. Fla. 2011)) and confirmation of the plaintiffs' standing to challenge the agreement (950 F. Supp. 2d 548 (S.D. Fla. 2013)). It highlighted systemic failures in handling sex trafficking cases and influenced broader scrutiny of Epstein's network, contributing to renewed investigations after his 2019 arrest. The case was ultimately dismissed in 2013 after the government appealed, but it set precedents for victims' rights in federal prosecutions and drew attention to Epstein's influential connections.

Related proceedings involved grand jury secrecy and public access issues, with rulings emphasizing the need to protect ongoing investigations (Jane Doe #1 v. United States, 2013 WL 12080929 (S.D. Fla. 2013)). The litigation underscored controversies surrounding Epstein's lenient treatment, allegedly influenced by his ties to powerful figures, and remains a key reference in discussions of accountability in high-profile abuse cases.