WEST PALM BEACH — U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra is now poised to decide whether to throw out a controversial deal that allowed Jeffrey Epstein to escape federal charges in connection with allegations that he sexually assaulted dozens of teenage girls at his Palm Beach mansion a decade ago.

With the 66-year-old financier now jailed on child sex trafficking charges in New York, the legal landscape has changed since Marra in February ruled that federal prosecutors in South Florida violated the rights of the young women by not telling them about the non-prosecution agreement they hashed out with Epstein’s high-powered legal team.

In the last of various dueling legal briefs that are to be filed before Marra decides whether the once secret agreement will be tossed out, attorneys for two of Epstein’s accusers on Tuesday asked Marra to rule quickly that the secret pact should be scrapped.

>>Jeffrey Epstein case: No easy solution to fixing breach of victims’ rights

Further, they insisted that the New York charges shouldn’t shield the jetting-setting, politically-connected millionaire from being prosecuted in federal court in West Palm Beach.

Likewise, they said, contrary to arguments raised by Epstein’s New York legal team, the 2007 agreement shouldn’t give the convicted sex offender immunity from prosecution in Manhattan on the two charges that could send him to prison for 45 years.

"The NPA in this case has no connection to or bearing on that prosecution there — and the Court should craft remedies for the victims in this District for the violations of rights that occurred here," attorneys Paul Cassell and Bradley Edwards wrote on behalf of two former Palm Beach County residents. One has been identified as Courtney Wild. The other is known only as Jane Doe.

>>RELATED: Judge rules feds’ agreement with billionaire violated teen victims’ rights

The only way to compensate the women for “the illegal bargain” struck between Epstein and federal prosecutors in South Florida is to invalidate the agreement and order government lawyers to meet with Epstein’s accusers as required under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, they said.

In their 70-page legal brief, they reminded Marra of the uproar that greeted Epstein’s July 6 arrest and the accompanying news about what most have described as a sweetheart deal.

"This secret justice for Epstein and his co-conspirators has led to a national outcry about unfairness and unequal treatment of the wealthy and powerful in the criminal justice system," they wrote.

The furor prompted former South Florida U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, who signed off on the agreement, to resign as U.S. labor secretary. He blamed then Palm Beach County State Attorney Barry Krischer for not pursuing serious charges against Epstein, which forced federal prosecutors to act. Krischer fired back that Acosta was trying to "rewrite history."

Instead of pursuing a 53-page indictment that his line prosecutors prepared against Epstein, Acosta allowed Epstein to plead guilty to two state prostitution charges. Epstein served 13 months in a largely vacant wing of the Palm Beach County Stockade — a cell he was allowed to leave 12 hours a day, six days a week. He was also required to register as a sex offender and to settle civil suits filed against him by roughly three dozen women.

Cassell and Edwards disputed claims by Epstein’s attorneys and federal prosecutors, who insist that Marra can’t throw out the agreement.

In court papers filed two weeks ago, Epstein’s Miami attorney attorney Roy Black said Cassell and Edwards are asking Marra “to do something that has never been done in the history of American jurisprudence.”

Edwards and Cassell countered that letting the non-prosecution agreement stand would violate federal law.

"The public policy Congress announced in the (Crime Victims’ Rights Act) invalidates practices whereby victims 'were kept in the dark by prosecutors too busy to care ... and by a court system that simply did not have a place for them,'" they wrote, quoting U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein’s remarks in 2004 when the measure was passed.

"That plan to keep the victims in the dark was patently illegal under the CVRA," Edwards and Cassell continued. The deal was cloaked in secrecy until 2009 when, in response to lawsuits filed by victims' attorneys, The Palm Beach Post and other media outlets, Circuit Judge Jeffrey Colbath agreed it should be released to the public.

If some of Epstein’s accusers aren’t interested in seeing him prosecuted for allegedly luring them to his mansion for nude massages that, for most, led to sex, that is their right, Cassell and Edwards said. The federal act, however, requires prosecutors to meet with them and discuss their plans.

But, they said, their clients, and undoubtedly many of Epstein’s other victims, want him to pay for molesting them when some were as young as 14.

"The court now possesses ample power to respond to this deliberate attempt to keep innocent victims uncertain about why multiple federal sex crimes against them were to go unpunished,' they wrote.

If Marra has additional questions about how to compensate Epstein’s victims for having their rights violated, the two attorneys asked him to schedule a hearing. But, they said, too much time has passed already.

"Any delay in ruling could further compound the damage that has already been done to Epstein's Florida victims by denying them an opportunity to meaningfully confer about federal charges being filed in this District — particularly given recent and on-going developments in New York that, while independent of this case, may make it more difficult for (them) to seek prosecution here," they wrote.

jmusgrave@pbpost.com

pbpcourts@twitter.com