DOJ Says It May Drop Boeing Criminal Fraud Case Over 737 Max Crashes
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said it may drop its criminal prosecution of Boeing over allegations that the company deceived federal regulators before two 737 Max crashes that killed 346 people.
In a May 17 filing, the DOJ
The department told the families that no final decision had been made. It also noted that the families consistently advocated for a public trial and were opposed to a motion to dismiss the case.
Boeing faces a criminal fraud conspiracy charge stemming from two 737 Max crashes that occurred within five months of each other: one off the coast of Indonesia in October 2018 and another in Ethiopia in May 2019. All passengers and crew aboard both flights were killed.
Investigators linked both crashes to a flight control system known as the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System, or MCAS.
Designed to automatically push the plane's nose down if a sensor detected a stall, MCAS relied on input from a single angle-of-attack sensor. In both accidents, erroneous sensor readings activated MCAS, sending the aircraft into dives that the pilots were unable to recover from.
Related Stories
9/5/2024
7/8/2024
According to a
Federal prosecutors later
In 2021, Boeing reached a $2.5 billion settlement with the DOJ that allowed it to avoid prosecution. The agreement included a $243.6 million criminal fine and commitments from Boeing to improve compliance and safety programs.
In May 2024, prosecutors alleged Boeing had violated the terms of that agreement by failing to implement promised reforms designed to prevent violations of federal anti-fraud laws. In response, Boeing agreed last July to a guilty plea deal, which included another $243.6 million fine, $455 million for safety and compliance improvements over the next three years, and oversight by a government-appointed independent monitor.
That plea deal was rejected in December by U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor in Fort Worth, Texas, who sided with victims' families demanding a trial.
The judge took issue with the selection process for an independent monitor, saying that the diversity, inclusion, and equity (DEI) policies in the government and at Boeing could allow race or other diversity factors to influence the selection. He also criticized the agreement for excluding the court from any role in the monitor's appointment.
'It is fair to say the government's attempt to ensure compliance has failed. At this point, the public interest requires the court to step in,' O'Connor
'Marginalizing the court in the selection and monitoring of the independent monitor as the plea agreement does undermine public confidence in Boeing's probation.'
A trial in the case is currently
Boeing and the Justice Department did not respond to requests for comments by publication time.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
6 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
California Protesters Clash With Federal Agents for a Second Day
Protesters and federal law enforcement clashed Saturday in the streets of Paramount, Calif., less than 24 hours after a series of protests roiled Los Angeles. The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department said its personnel responded to a large gathering of people around Paramount Boulevard in Paramount, which is about 16 miles south of downtown Los Angeles.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump signals case against Abrego Garcia will be ‘very easy'
President Trump on Saturday said the Justice Department's (DOJ) latest case against Kilmar Abrego Garcia — the man mistakenly deported to El Salvador earlier this year amid Trump's crackdown on illegal immigration — should be 'very easy' for prosecutors. The comment comes after news broke Friday that Abrego Garcia would return to the U.S. to face smuggling charges stemming from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee. Asked about the administration's seeming reversal in bringing the man home, the president gave full credit to DOJ. 'The Department of Justice decided to do it that way, and that's fine,' Trump told NBC News in a phone call Saturday, adding, 'that wasn't my decision.' But, he told the outlet, 'It should be a very easy case.' The unsealed indictment charges Abrego Garcia with the unlawful transportation of undocumented aliens and a related conspiracy charge. According to the court filing, prosecutors allege that he made more than 100 trips between Texas and other areas in the U.S. over the course of several years to transport illegal immigrants in exchange for money. Attorney General Pam Bondi on Friday took a victory lap over the case. 'Our government presented El Salvador with an arrest warrant, and they agreed to return him to our country,' she told reporters during a news conference. 'The grand jury found that over the past nine years, Abrego Garcia has played a significant role in an alien smuggling ring.' 'They found this was his full-time job, not a contractor. He was a smuggler of humans and children and women,' Bondi added. The DOJ chief also noted that once a trial is complete, Abrego Garcio once again be deported to El Salvador. His return to the U.S. comes after the White House fought numerous court rulings for months that ordered the administration to facilitate his return, including one from the Supreme Court. Trump, officials and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele alike rejected the order, arguing the man — who had been living in Maryland under a protective order — was linked to MS-13 gang activity. Asked if he had spoken to Bukele in recent days, the president told the outlet that he had not. The two met at the White House earlier this year. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who faced scrutiny earlier this year over his meeting with Abrego Garcia in El Salvador, called his return to the U.S. a 'victory' for due process, despite the charges. 'This is a victory for due process. It's a victory for the Constitution. It should not have taken this long. I mean … the Trump administration dragged its feet for a very long time and ignored a 9 to 0 order from the Supreme Court,' he told MSNBC in an interview Friday. 'But it's important that Abrego Garcia now come home and have his due process rights upheld in a court of law.' Trump responded to the comments by calling Van Hollen a 'loser.' 'He's a loser. The guy's a loser. They're going to lose because of that same thing. That's not what people want to hear,' he told NBC on Saturday. 'He's trying to defend a man who's got a horrible record of abuse, abuse of women in particular.' 'No, he's a total loser, this guy,' the president added. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Warren Buffett Says Toughest Question He's Ever Been Asked Is Whether Minimum Wage Should Go Up — 'I Don't Know If People Will Be Better Off'
For most of us, a tough question sounds like "Where do you see yourself in five years?" or "Why is your child eating peanut butter off the floor?" But for Warren Buffett—a man who's fielded questions about billions, bailouts, and Berkshire—his hardest question had nothing to do with stocks. It was about the minimum wage. In a 2015 CNN interview with Poppy Harlow, Buffett was asked if the federal minimum wage should be raised from $7.25 an hour. Harlow didn't tiptoe into it—she reminded him he'd already called it the most difficult question he'd ever been asked. Don't Miss: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — Maximize saving for your retirement and cut down on taxes: . "Last year when I asked you, Warren, if the federal minimum wage should be raised from $7.25 an hour, you said: 'That is the toughest question you could ask me, because I've been thinking about it for 50 years, and I don't know the answer.'" When pressed again, Buffett acknowledged the dilemma hadn't gotten any easier. "I'd like to see everybody make $20 an hour at a minimum," he said, but quickly added, "I know if you increase it to $20 an hour, you'd have millions of people unemployed. I don't know how to calibrate it precisely." A decade later, it's clear the country doesn't either. The federal minimum wage hasn't budged, and the same economic tension Buffett described—between higher pay and potential job loss—still keeps policymakers in a holding pattern. Even now, the "toughest question" remains unanswered. Trending: Invest where it hurts — and help millions heal:. Buffett isn't alone in wrestling with this. The economic debate over minimum wage is decades deep, and not without its contradictions. Studies from the Congressional Budget Office and economists across the political spectrum suggest that modest increases in the minimum wage can lift incomes and reduce poverty—but may also lead to some job losses, particularly among young or low-skilled workers. The bigger the hike, the higher the risk. Cities like Seattle and San Francisco have raised their minimum wages well above the federal level and early research has shown mixed results. Some workers earned more. Others saw hours cut. In industries with tight margins—like restaurants and retail—businesses have had to adjust, and not all managed to stay afloat. It's exactly the kind of tradeoff Buffett worries about. "You do lose some employment as you increase the minimum wage," he said. "If you didn't, I would be for having it $15 an hour." The reality, he suggests, is that there's no one-size-fits-all solution—just difficult compromises between helping workers and protecting believes there's a better tool in the policy toolkit: the earned income tax credit. It's a refundable tax credit that boosts the income of low-to-moderate earners, without placing the full cost on employers. "I personally believe that the earned income tax credit is a much better way of handling the problem of people who are really not paid enough to live decently," Buffett explained. In 2013, the EITC delivered over $56 billion in aid. Buffett thinks it should go even further—expanded and "done smarter." It's a solution designed to lift up workers without risking jobs. But unlike wage hikes, the earned income tax credit depends on political will, budget priorities—and it often flies under the radar. Many workers who qualify never even claim it. Buffett's honesty on this is rare. After 50 years of watching markets, reading economic data, and weighing the trade-offs, he's still torn. "I don't know if more people will be better off," he admitted. And that's coming from a man who's made a living betting big on long-term outcomes. But maybe that's the point: when even Warren Buffett hesitates to take a side, it's probably not a black-and-white issue. Read Next: Here's what Americans think you need to be considered wealthy. Image: Shutterstock UNLOCKED: 5 NEW TRADES EVERY WEEK. Click now to get top trade ideas daily, plus unlimited access to cutting-edge tools and strategies to gain an edge in the markets. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article Warren Buffett Says Toughest Question He's Ever Been Asked Is Whether Minimum Wage Should Go Up — 'I Don't Know If People Will Be Better Off' originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
