US Supreme Court snubs bid to revive plea deal for accused 9/11 mastermind


FILE PHOTO: Chain link fence and concertina wire surrounds Joint Task Force Guantanamo's Camp Delta at the U.S. Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba March 22, 2016. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson/File Photo

Oct 19 (Reuters) - The US ⁠Supreme Court declined on Monday to hear a bid by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the accused ⁠mastermind of the September 11, 2001, attacks, to revive a 2024 agreement that would ‌have spared him the death penalty in exchange for a guilty plea — a deal scrapped by former Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.

The justices turned away appeals by Mohammed and two co-defendants who had also signed plea agreements of a lower court's ruling ​that upheld Austin's decision to void the deals. The US ⁠Court of Appeals for the District of ⁠Columbia Circuit rejected an argument that Austin, who served under former President Joe Biden, had acted too ⁠late.

The ‌Supreme Court's action marks the latest milestone in a military prosecution of the detainees held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, that has been beset by two decades of legal gridlock.

In August, a ⁠US Air Force judge set the trial for Mohammed and his ​co-defendants for June 2028.

Mohammed remains ‌the most well-known inmate at the Guantanamo detention facility, which was set up in ⁠2002 by then-US President ​George W. Bush to house foreign terrorism suspects following the 9/11 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people. Mohammed is accused of orchestrating the plot to fly hijacked passenger jetliners into the World Trade Center in New York ⁠City and into the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia.

The plea agreements ​for Mohammed and co-defendants Mustafa al Hawsawi and Walid bin 'Atash had been offered and accepted by the US official overseeing the Pentagon's Guantanamo war court, prompting criticism by Republican lawmakers.

Austin revoked the deals two days ⁠later.

A military judge ruled that Austin lacked authority to invalidate the plea deals in a decision that was upheld in December by the US Court of Military Commission Review. The judge then scheduled prompt plea hearings.

The D.C. Circuit paused those proceedings, and in July 2025, a panel of that court — ​in a 2-1 vote — backed the decision to scrap the plea deals, ⁠saying that Austin "indisputably had legal authority to withdraw from the agreements."

Defense attorneys for Mohammed and al Hawsawi, ​including lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union, urged the Supreme ‌Court to hear the case. They said Austin's ​action violated controlling military law and "prolonged the best chance for finality in the September 11 case in a quarter century."

(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Editing by Will Dunham)

Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel for breaking news alerts and key updates!

Next In World

Georgian journalist jailed for 30 days for criticising government figures online
Analysis-France's unrest lays bare 'slow agony' of Macron's twilight months
Italian police detain hundreds as stores looted in weekend unrest in Milan
Pope Leo to hold Wednesday audience for first time since cancer surgery
Search for the wreckage of aviation pioneer Amelia Earhart's plane comes up empty
Alberta votes on leaving Canada; separatist movement likely to outlast expected defeat
Terrorism squad probes vehicle attack that critically injured Australian lawmaker
El Ni�o-powered drought leaves Indonesian palm farmers high and dry as river recedes
Spain's rush to clear Ceuta migrant backlog raises rights concerns
Twelve migrants, including infant, drown as boats capsize off Greek islands

Air Pollutant Index

Note: API is calculated based on 24hr running average of the most dominant parameter.

Highest API Readings

    Select State and Location to view the latest API reading

    Others Also Read