Supreme Court turns away bid to revive plea deal for accused 9/11 mastermind

The US Supreme Court on Monday turned away a bid by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to revive a plea agreement. Mohammed is accused of being the mastermind of the attacks of 11 September 2001. The Guardian, the South China Morning Post (SCMP) and Reuters each reported the decision.

Under the agreement, reached in 2024, Mohammed would have pleaded guilty and avoided the death penalty. Lloyd Austin, then defense secretary under President Joe Biden, threw out the deal. Plea agreements for two of Mohammed's co-defendants were also revoked. A US appeals court found that Austin acted within his legal authority. A trial date has been set for 2028.

Background and further details

According to the Guardian, the agreement would have imposed a sentence of life in prison without parole. The Guardian reported that military prosecutors and the Pentagon's senior official for Guantánamo Bay had approved the deal before Austin intervened. It reported that Austin threw out the deal in 2024.

According to the SCMP, Austin ordered the deals thrown out after some victims' families criticized them. The Guardian reported that relatives of victims were split. Some saw a trial as the best path to justice. Others saw the deals as the best hope of bringing the case to a conclusion.

The SCMP identified the co-defendants as Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawsawi. It reported that they joined Mohammed in the appeal to the Supreme Court. It also reported that all three are still held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. According to the SCMP, the appellate ruling came last year. The SCMP quoted the appeals court as saying Austin "acted within the bounds of his legal authority." According to the Guardian, the appeals panel was divided. The SCMP reported that the trial is set to begin in June 2028.

According to the Guardian, Mohammed is accused of developing and directing the plot to crash hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Another hijacked plane crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.

What each side says

• Lloyd Austin: According to the Guardian, Austin's stated reason for throwing out the deal was that a decision on the death penalty in an attack as grave as 11 September should be made only by the defense secretary.
• Mohammed's defense attorneys: According to the Guardian, they say Austin acted too late in revoking the plea agreement.

What the reports do not include

The reports reviewed by Vocemundi do not describe the Supreme Court's reasoning or vote, or whether any justice dissented. They do not include reactions to Monday's decision from defense attorneys, prosecutors, the Pentagon or victims' families. They do not give the exact dates of Austin's order or of the appellate ruling. They do not explain how the timing of Austin's revocation was assessed, and they do not state whether further legal avenues remain open to the defendants.

Analysis

With the Supreme Court declining to intervene, the case appears set to move toward a trial rather than a negotiated resolution, according to the trial date reported by the Guardian and the SCMP. The decision leaves in place an appellate finding on the defense secretary's authority over plea deals in this case, though the reports do not show how broadly that finding may apply. Families of victims, as reported by the Guardian, have held differing views on whether a trial or a plea deal best serves justice. Whether the defendants pursue other legal options, and how the 2028 trial proceeds, remains to be seen.

Produced by the Vocemundi newsroom with AI assistance.