Federal court stays Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's guilty plea hearing
The Biden administration succeeded in blocking a plea deal for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed on Thursday after a federal court issued an administrative stay of a hearing set for Friday.
The alleged 9/11 mastermind was expected to plead guilty as part of an agreement worked out by military prosecutors that would have removed the death penalty as a possibility in his case.
"The purpose of this administrative stay is to allow the court time to receive full briefing on the mandamus petition, to hear oral argument on an expedited basis, and to render a decision on the petition and stay motion," the order from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said. "The administrative stay should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits of that petition or motion."
The order set deadlines for legal documents to be filed by Jan. 22, meaning the legal case will carry into the first days of the Trump administration.
On Tuesday, the Biden administration petitioned the federal court seeking a stay of the plea agreement for Mohammed and two other alleged 9/11 plotters that has been opposed by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.
The bid to stay the hearing followed a ruling last week by a military appeals court that Austin was not authorized to withdraw the plea agreement worked out by military prosecutors.
Under the plea deal, Mohammed, Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarak bin 'Attash and Mustafa Ahmed Adam al Hawsawi would enter guilty pleas for their role in the 9/11 attacks in return for the removal of the death penalty. In August, Austin withdrew the agreement just days after it had been made public.
However, the military judge overseeing the case ruled that Austin did not have that authority, a ruling that was upheld last week by the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review.
Both of the military courts rejected the Defense Department's argument that Austin had the right to withdraw from the plea agreement, in part because Mohammed and the other plotters began "performing promises" in the agreement by signing stipulations of their guilt prior to Austin signing his memo.
In its filings with the federal court, the administration argued that was a misstatement of what actually happened.
"The text of the agreements makes clear that signing the factual stipulations was part of the process through which the agreements were formed, not performance of a promise under the agreements once they were signed," the Justice Department's filing said.
The Justice Department argued that moving forward with the plea hearings "will deprive the government and the American people of a public trial as to the respondents' guilt and the possibility of capital punishment" for what the government called "the most egregious criminal act on American soil in modern history."
The administration's filing called the 9/11 attack "a heinous act of mass murder that caused the death of thousands of people and shocked the nation and the world."
The Military Commissions Act says that only the accused can appeal a commission's decision to the D.C. Circuit. Nevertheless, the Biden administration is asking the appeals court for extraordinary relief -- a directive from the civilian judges to the commission recognizing Austin's action as legitimate.
"The text of the agreements makes clear that signing the factual stipulations was part of the process through which the agreements were formed, not performance of a promise under the agreements once they were signed," the petition filed by Matthew Olsen, assistant attorney general for national security, and Brian Fletcher, the principal deputy solicitor general, said.
