On Thursday, the Biden administration managed to temporarily postpone the guilty plea of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is accused of masterminding the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. This action undermines a plea agreement that would have protected him from facing the death penalty in connection with the al-Qaida attacks on the United States.
Administration lawyers petitioned a federal appeals court to halt the scheduled plea proceedings for Mohammed, which were set to take place at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Defense attorneys criticized this intervention, labeling it as just one more incident in a long history of “fitful” and “negligent” management of Mohammed’s case by U.S. military forces and various administrations over the past two decades.
The federal appeals court granted a temporary stay on Thursday evening. The court emphasized that this stay was only a short-term measure while they carefully reviewed the government’s arguments, clarifying that it should not be interpreted as a final decision.
This decision delays a resolution to more than 20 years of military prosecution fraught with legal complications related to one of the deadliest attacks in U.S. history. The government’s legal maneuver marked its final attempt to block Mohammed’s guilty plea, which was scheduled for Friday. Family members of some of the nearly 3,000 victims killed in the September 11 attacks had already gathered at the naval base in Guantanamo Bay to witness the proceedings.
The situation has positioned the Biden administration in opposition to military officials assigned to oversee justice for the attacks that took place on September 11, leading to countless fatalities. This latest twist signifies the ongoing turbulence and uncertainty that has characterized two decades of problematic prosecution regarding one of the most catastrophic incidents on U.S. soil.
Following a meeting in Germany about military assistance for Ukraine, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin commented on the appeal, reiterating his opposition to the plea deal and citing the ongoing court challenge as a reason for not elaborating further.
The plea agreement, which took two years to negotiate and received approval from military prosecutors and a senior official at the Pentagon for Guantanamo in late July, would have alleviated the risk of the death penalty for Mohammed and two co-defendants. It also compels them to address any unanswered questions from the victims’ families regarding the attacks.
However, defense attorneys assert that the plea agreements are already in effect and dispute Austin’s legal authority to nullify them post-factum. Meanwhile, preparations have been set in motion for the upcoming hearing at Guantanamo, with family members of victims already present. If the plea hearing continues as planned, Mohammed will take an oath in the military courtroom, and defense attorney Gary Sowards will enter pleas for him to 2,976 counts of murder among other allegations.
The co-defendants, Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al Hawsawi, are slated to enter their pleas later this month. Following these proceedings, months of sentencing hearings are expected, providing the government a platform to present its case and allowing families to express their grief.
Over the past 17 years since charges were filed against Mohammed—who is believed to have orchestrated the hijacked plane attacks—the case has faced numerous legal and logistical hurdles. It remains in pretrial hearings without a confirmed trial date. Ongoing debates between defense and prosecution about the admissibility of prior statements made by Mohammed and other defendants, following their torture in CIA custody, have further complicated the process.
This summer, military prosecutors informed victim families that the senior Pentagon official overseeing Guantanamo had signed off on the plea deal, which they argued was “the best path to finality and justice.” However, on August 2, Austin unexpectedly announced the cancellation of the agreement, asserting that decisions regarding death penalties in such serious cases should lie with the defense secretary.
Subsequently, the Biden administration approached the District of Columbia federal appeals court this week after both the Guantanamo judge and a military review panel rejected Austin’s intervention. Mohammed’s legal team contended that Austin’s “extraordinary intervention” was indicative of his failure to adequately supervise his appointed delegate in charge of Guantanamo.
The Justice Department emphasized that accepting the guilty pleas would cause irreparable damage to the government, depriving it of the opportunity for a public trial and the chance to push for capital punishment against the three men implicated in mass murder that deeply shocked both the nation and the world.
