A federal appeals court has delayed a scheduled military court hearing, where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and two co-conspirators were expected to plead guilty as part of a deal negotiated with prosecutors. The plea deals, which would allow the three 9/11 terrorists to avoid the death penalty and face life in prison, have been widely criticized by the public and victims’ families.
The delay is welcome news for those who opposed the plea deals, prolonging a decades-long quest for justice from the families of the victims. The deals were meant to wrap up the case, but many are skeptical about the government’s motives.
“Why did the government settle for a plea deal after 23 years of building a case?” said Brett Eagleson, president of 9/11 Justice. “It’s our thought that this was rescinded in name only and like it was done right before the election. So, Austin was trying to save any attempts at sort of a political loss on this.”
The Department of Justice has appealed the decision, and the defense now has until January 17 to offer a full response. Oral arguments on the issue are expected to follow.
The plea deals were struck between military prosecutors and defense lawyers, but were met with strong opposition from the public and even within the Biden administration. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was initially expected to block the deal, but a military appeals court ruled that he did not have the authority to do so.
The case has been ongoing for over two decades, with various judges assigned to the case, resulting in numerous delays. Former Attorney General Eric Holder has blamed “political hacks” for preventing a U.S.-based trial and leading to the plea deal.
The victims’ families have been waiting for justice, and many are skeptical about the government’s motives. “You would think that the government has an opportunity to make right, and you would think that they would be salivating at the opportunity to bring us justice,” said Eagleson. “Rather than doing that, they shroud everything in secrecy. They’re rushing to get these plea deals done, and they’re marching forward despite the objections of us.”
The case has seen many twists and turns, including the 2013 decision to try the men in a military commission instead of a federal court. Then-Attorney General Eric Holder had wanted to try the men in a Manhattan court, but faced opposition in Congress.
The case has resulted in many who were convicted of terrorism charges in the U.S. but the 9/11 case has been a unique and challenging case. “The military commission has really been a failure,” said John Ryan, a retired agent on the FBI’s joint terrorism task force in New York. “Hundreds of people have been convicted of terrorism charges in the U.S., but the military commission’s 9/11 case has been a revolving door of judges, who then each take time to get up to speed with the 400,000 pages and exhibits in the case.”