The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 19 rejected a bid by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the accused mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and two co-defendants to revive plea agreements that had been revoked by the Pentagon. The court’s unsigned order upheld a lower court decision, leaving in place the withdrawal of the agreements by then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin in 2024.
The plea deals, which would have spared the three men the death penalty in exchange for guilty pleas and life sentences, were initially approved by military prosecutors and the Guantanamo Bay convening authority before Austin intervened. The Supreme Court’s decision marks the latest step in a prolonged legal process that has faced repeated delays since the defendants were charged in 2008.
A trial date of June 2028 has been set, though its timeline remains contingent on meeting procedural deadlines. The case has been complicated by long-standing legal disputes over the admissibility of evidence obtained during the defendants’ detention in CIA black sites, where they were subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques prior to their transfer to Guantanamo Bay in 2006.
Austin’s 2024 decision to withdraw the plea agreements cited his authority under the Military Commissions Act of 2009, asserting that decisions regarding the death penalty in such a high-profile case should rest with the defense secretary. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit previously upheld Austin’s action, rejecting arguments that he acted too late.
The three defendants—Mohammed, Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi, and Walid bin Attash—remain detained at Guantanamo Bay, where they have been held since 2006. All three were captured in 2003 and charged with multiple crimes, including conspiracy and murder, in connection with the Sept. 11 attacks. The plea agreements, reached in 2024, required the defendants to plead guilty to all charges and face a public sentencing hearing where they would answer questions from victims’ families.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh did not participate in the Supreme Court’s consideration of the appeal. The high court’s decision clears the way for military prosecutors to proceed with the case, though the path forward remains uncertain given the case’s history of legal and procedural hurdles.