Guantánamo plea deals for accused 9/11 plotters are canceled by federal appeals court
In a divided ruling, a federal appeals court panel has canceled plea deals reached with three men accused of orchestrating the 9/11 attacks, deepening the legal morass surrounding the long-stalled case. Lawyers for the defendants, including alleged ringleader Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, are weighing whether to appeal the decision to the full federal bench or the U.S. Supreme Court.
The issue before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was whether former Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin acted legally when he rescinded the plea deals two days after they were announced last summer by a U.S. military court in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Austin said the agreements, which would have let the 9/11 defendants plead guilty in return for sentences of up to life in prison, caught him off-guard. He wanted the case to proceed toward a death-penalty trial.
Lawyers for the defendants expressed disbelief that Austin could have been blindsided by the deals, pointing out that plea negotiations had been underway for more than two years. They noted that his own prosecutors have said settlement agreements are the best resolution to the 9/11 case, which has limped along for more than two decades without going to trial.
Defense attorneys also argued that because Austin had given a military court official the power to approve plea deals, he could not rescind the agreements simply because he disliked their terms. Both a military court judge and military appeals panel agreed with that argument and upheld the deals, finding that Austin acted too late and beyond the scope of his authority by trying to reverse them after they were made.
Friday’s 2-to-1 vote by a three-judge panel of the federal appeals court — Obama appointees Patricia Millett and Robert Wilkins, and Trump appointee Neomi Rao — rejected those lower-court decisions. That higher court found that Austin “indisputably had legal authority” to cancel the deals.
Wilkins, who had already indicated in an earlier court filing that he considered the government’s case weak, dissented. Saying he was “befuddled” by his fellow judges’ decision, Wilkins wrote that they were “ignoring and departing from longstanding principles of well-earned deference to our colleagues in the military justice system.” He also wrote that “the government has not come within a country mile of proving clearly and indisputably that the Military Judge erred.”
The defendants must now decide whether to appeal the ruling to the full appeals court, or appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, or eventually both. Matthew Engle, a lawyer for 9/11 defendant Walid bin Attash, told NPR on Friday that “we’re going to weigh our options, and I’ll meet with Mr. bin Attash next week and we’ll decide next steps.”
To the enormous exasperation of 9/11 family members, the September 11th terrorism case has been mired in “pre-trial hearings” for years while the defendants sit behind bars, legally innocent, at Guantánamo. The case is widely considered impossible to take to trial, in part because the accused men were tortured in secret CIA prisons, resulting in unresolved legal fights over what evidence is admissible and what material is classified.
“I’m really feeling very frustrated, and I’ve reached a point where I’m losing my decorum, in a sense,” said Elizabeth Miller, whose father died in the 9/11 attacks and who supports plea deals, “because the main theme is waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, and I’m really not sure how this is going to end — if it’s ever going to end.”
But another 9/11 family member, Brett Eagleson, whose father died in the World Trade Center collapse, called Friday’s ruling “a win.”
“We absolutely need a trial, and a plea deal, a plea bargain, would have taken that right away from us,” he said. “As Americans, as humans, we have the right for justice, and that’s how we get the truth.”
If the deals do not go forward, prosecutors and defense attorneys both say the 9/11 case could continue for years more — possibly, according to one defense lawyer, until the year 2050.
The plea deals are sealed, and on Friday the federal appeals court also dismissed a request by a media consortium that includes NPR to make them public. The dismissal, it wrote, came “in light of” its ruling in favor of former defense secretary Austin.
Kimmel and Colbert appear as guests on each other’s shows
On Tuesday night, in New York City, they united in a special talk show crossover of Jimmy Kimmel Live! on ABC and The Late Show with Stephen Colbert on CBS.
Poll: Agreement that political violence may be necessary to right the country grows
On hot button issues, a majority say children should be vaccinated; controlling gun violence is more important than gun rights; and Epstein files should be released, in a new NPR/PBS News/Marist poll.
Federal agencies are rehiring workers and spending more after DOGE’s push to cut
Eight months after the Department of Government Efficiency effort to shrink the federal workforce began, some agencies are hiring workers back – and spending more money than before.
Taylor Swift popularized fighting for masters. Are more artists getting ownership?
Taylor Swift turned masters ownership from a behind-the-scenes conversation into a mainstream debate about artist autonomy. But how has that fight influenced other artists in the music industry?
A GOP push to restrict voting by overseas U.S. citizens continues before 2026 midterms
Republican officials are pushing for more voting restrictions on U.S. citizens who were born abroad and have never lived in the country, after unsuccessfully challenging their ballots in 2024.
Fans of the mysterious Mothman bring its West Virginia hometown new life
It started in the 1960s, when two couples told a harrowing story about being chased by a large flying creature on a rural road. It grew from there — and now 20,000 people come to celebrate Mothman.