Justice Department agrees to end Biden-era felony case against Boeing
The Justice Department announced an agreement Friday to end its felony case against Boeing for the plane-maker's role in two passenger jet crashes that killed a total of 346 people in Indonesia and Ethiopia — less than a year after the company agreed to plead guilty as part of a deal with the Biden administration.
In return, Boeing must pay over $1.1 billion in fines, safety improvements and compensation for families of the people who died in the crashes in October 2018 and March 2019. Those disasters, involving Boeing's 737 MAX 8 jet, kicked off years of still-unresolved questions from lawmakers and safety experts about the federal government's oversight of the giant manufacturer and defense contractor.
Boeing would have to "admit to conspiracy to obstruct and impede" federal regulators, but DOJ would agree to ask a judge to dismiss the case, the department said in a court filing. The government would have the option of refiling the charges later.
Under last year's plea agreement, Boeing would have pleaded guilty to a felony of conspiracy to defraud the government, paid a total of $487 million in fines and subjected itself to an independent third-party monitor, among other provisions.
Democratic lawmakers assailed DOJ's shift as news of the pending deal circulated this week, the latest in a string of cases in which President Donald Trump's administration has offered more leniency to alleged corporate wrongdoing than Biden's agencies had.
'There's no way that Boeing should be allowed to reopen or evade responsibility for this,' Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal, the top Democrat on the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, told POLITICO Wednesday after news of the pending deal had broken last week.
Lawmakers of both parties had scorched Boeing's safety record at a Senate hearing last June, where then-CEO David Calhoun stood and apologized to family members of some of the 346 victims. The senators focused not only on the 2018-19 crashes but also on more recent signs of trouble with the MAX, including a January 2024 incident in which a door plug blew out of an Alaska Airlines jet over Portland, Oregon. Whistleblowers at an earlier hearing last year testified to what they called a culture of promoting business over safety at Boeing.
The deal, however, leaves open the possibility of re-filing the criminal charge if the department finds Boeing to be non-compliant with the new terms. According to the government's court filing Friday, Boeing will have to "admit to conspiracy to obstruct and impede the lawful operation of the Federal Aviation Administration Aircraft Evaluation Group," and the non-prosecution agreement "will not provide protection against prosecution for any other misconduct."
"On top of the financial investments, Boeing must continue to improve the effectiveness of its anti-fraud compliance and ethics program and retain an independent compliance consultant," a Justice Department spokesperson said Friday. Boeing did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The first Trump administration's handling of the two deadly 737 MAX crashes drew criticism at the time, including for the FAA's slowness to join other countries throughout the world in ordering the jet to be grounded after the second crash in 2019. At one point, Trump spoke by phone with then-Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg, who reassured the president that the MAX was safe to fly.
Investigators blamed the crashes on Boeing's failure to inform the FAA about details of a new flight control software system in the MAX, which was implicated in both disasters. They also faulted the FAA's over-reliance on Boeing employees to vouch for the safety of the plane's design, among a host of other issues.
The fraud conspiracy charge stemmed from allegations that Boeing had violated the terms of a 2021 deferred-prosecution agreement with the DOJ in which the department allowed Boeing to avoid prosecution in exchange for fines and internal changes at the company. The department announced that deal at an exceedingly volatile moment in Washington: one day after the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol.
Families of the 346 victims' families have criticized the federal government's handling of the case virtually from its inception, including the 2021 agreement and last year's plea deal. They had wanted the department to pursue criminal charges, alleging that the company had knowingly put people in harm's way, but the DOJ has maintained that it couldn't prove such charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
"Victims are at the heart of the Department's mission, and this case is no exception," the DOJ spokesperson said. "The Department has met extensively with the crash victims' families. While they are all experiencing grief, they hold a broad set of views regarding the resolution, ranging from support to disagreement. Ultimately, in applying the facts, the law, and Department policy, we are confident that this resolution is the most just outcome with practical benefits.
"Nothing will diminish the victims' losses, but this resolution holds Boeing financially accountable, provides finality and compensation for the families and makes an impact for the safety of future air travelers,' the person added.
After the January 2024 door plug blowout over Oregon, the department told a federal judge in May that newly revealed quality-control problems showed that the company had violated the 2021 agreement. That presented Boeing with a choice: take a plea or potentially stand trial. Boeing has maintained that it honored the terms of the deal.
Despite last summer's plea agreement, however, the case was not over. A federal judge rejected the deal in December, expressing concerns about diversity policies at both Boeing and the DOJ, and noting that victims' families also objected to the proposed oversight process. Boeing subsequently sought to withdraw its agreement to plead guilty, The Wall Street Journal reported in March.
DOJ's new about-face is already drawing ire on Capitol Hill.
Blumenthal and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) on Thursday sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi urging the department not to sign the agreement, saying it would be a way for Boeing to 'weasel its way out of accountability for its failed corporate culture, and for any illegal behavior that has resulted in deadly consequences.'
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), the ranking member of the Commerce Committee's aviation subcommittee, said before the announcement that she viewed the move as the Trump administration going soft on a big corporation.
'I think Boeing and FAA have both shown that they're incapable of proper oversight. ... They both have a terrible history,' she told POLITICO on Thursday.
The chair of that panel, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), demurred when asked about the legal proceedings. 'My view is this is a judicial, prosecutorial question in the courts, not my domain,' he said Wednesday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Feds seek to ditch settlement over alleged redlining with North Jersey bank
The Trump administration is asking a judge to drop a 2022 settlement the Justice Department had reached with North Jersey-based Lakeland Bank — which was later absorbed by Provident Bank — over allegations of redlining against Black and Hispanic customers. While Provident Bank said it will continue to provide low-cost mortgages to underserved communities, the motion by the U.S. Justice Department to abandon the settlement has drawn the ire of community advocates and legal experts, who say it would make it easier for banks to engage in redlining. 'It goes without saying it's a good thing when financial institutions are complying with those consent orders, but when you take away the teeth — the actual enforcement — who's to say that they will continue to comply,' said Leila Amirhamzeh, director of community reinvestment for New Jersey Citizen Action, a consumer advocacy four-page motion by the Justice Department, filed May 28 in U.S. District Court, seeks to terminate the consent order the Biden administration negotiated with what was then Lakeland Bank. In the initial complaint, the Justice Department said Lakeland violated the federal Fair Housing Act and Equal Credit Opportunity Act by deliberately avoiding banking with Black and Hispanic customers, particularly in and around Newark. The discrimination in question allegedly took place between 2015 and 2021, according to the Biden administration. To settle the complaint, Lakeland agreed to pay $12 million to subsidize mortgages, home improvement loans and home refinancing loans for Black and Hispanic residents and open two branches in underserved neighborhoods. Lakeland also had to provide $150,000 a year for advertising, outreach and consumer finance education in the Newark area. Newark Mayor and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ras Baraka wanted one of those new branches to be in his city, and the Greater Toms River Chamber of Commerce also wanted a branch in its area. According to the Provident Bank website, there are currently four locations in Newark and three in Toms River. After acquiring Lakeland, Provident took ownership of the settlement and the mandate to open two branches in underserved areas of New Jersey. The Justice Department in its motion to terminate the order said Lakeland reached substantial commitment to comply with the consent agreement and it is committed to continuing its disbursement of the loan subsidy. Provident spokesperson Keith Buscio told and the USA TODAY Network New Jersey that the bank remains committed to the loan subsidy initiative. He said Provident is not a party to the litigation and referred other questions to the Justice Department. The Justice Department could not immediately be reached for comment. Baraka's office in Newark said it is planning to hold a press conference about the motion by the Justice Department on June 5. Court filings show two attorneys who helped file the initial complaint against Lakeland, Michael Campion and Susan Millenky, withdrew as counsel from the case. Campion was appointed in 2022 to lead the U.S. Attorney's Office's Civil Rights Division that was created to enforce federal civil rights laws in New Jersey. The Fair Housing Act was passed as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 to prohibit landlords and mortgage lenders from discriminating based on race, religion, national origin or sex. Nearly 60 years later, racial wealth disparity remains vast. In New Jersey, the median household wealth of white families is $322,500, compared with $17,700 for Black families and $26,100 for Hispanic families, the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice said. In New Jersey, 77.3% of white residents owned a home in 2020. By comparison, 42.8% of Black residents and 32.7% of Hispanic residents were homeowners, according to the Urban Institute, a research group. Critics said the Justice Department's motion to drop the Lakeland settlement is a step by the Trump administration's bid to reverse diversity, equity and inclusion programs. David Troutt, a professor at Rutgers Law School in Newark, said the motion by the Justice Department to terminate the consent decree is part of a larger campaign by the department to rescind investigations and agreements involving anti-Black racism, while beginning investigations into what it deems 'illegal DEI.' 'The Trump administration's withdrawal from a federal consent decree without justification is an extraordinary act of endorsing racist practices and housing market manipulation,' Troutt said. 'For the very government that successfully enforced those borrowers' civil rights to now repudiate them sends a message unlike any we've seen since the federal government first endorsed redlining in the 1930s,' Troutt said. Lakeland isn't the only New Jersey bank that faced scrutiny under the Biden administration. Toms River-based OceanFirst Financial Corp. agreed to pay $14 million to subsidize mortgages, helping settle a lawsuit that alleged the bank violated federal discrimination laws. Since then, it has improved the rating given by federal bank regulators who oversee investments in underserved communities to 'outstanding.' The Justice Department hasn't filed a motion seeking to terminate the consent order with OceanFirst. But two attorneys who represented the U.S. in the initial complaint, Millenky and Nathan Shulock, have filed motions to withdraw from the case, according to the court docket. A combined 22 Provident and Lakeland branches closed in 2024 following the $1.3 billion merger creating a 'super community bank.' Each branch that closed was within roughly three miles of a nearby branch. Activists and opponents warned that the merger would mean fewer banking services would be available for underserved communities, such as people of color, the elderly and disabled. New Jersey Citizen Action applauded Provident for its continued commitment to the terms of the consent order. But the group said the Justice Department should continue to enforce it. 'When you actually terminate these consent orders, there's no deterrence, and it's basically telling financial institutions that the Department of Justice is going to be taking a hands-off approach to fair lending issues, to redlining,' New Jersey Citizen Action's Amirhamzeh said. Daniel Munoz covers business, consumer affairs, labor and the economy for and The Record. Email: munozd@ Twitter:@danielmunoz100 and Facebook Michael L. Diamond is a business reporter for the Asbury Park Press. He has been writing about the New Jersey economy and health care industry since 1999. He can be reached at mdiamond@ This article originally appeared on Feds seek to drop Lakeland Bank settlement over alleged redlining
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Citigroup reverses firearms policy after pressure from Trump administration on big banks
A month after the 2018 mass school shooting in Parkland, Florida, Citigroup enacted restrictions for its clients that sold firearms — the first major bank on Wall Street to do so. On Tuesday, the bank rolled back that policy. 'We also will no longer have a specific policy as it relates to firearms,' the company said in a statement Tuesday. 'The policy was intended to promote the adoption of best sales practices as prudent risk management and didn't address the manufacturing of firearms.' The decision comes as the Trump administration alleges that Wall Street is biased against conservatives — a right-wing talking point since more than a dozen state auditors accused Bank of America of 'politicized de-banking' in an open letter last year (de-banking is when a bank closes an account for a customer it deems high risk). At the time, Bank of America said it has 'no political litmus test.' On Tuesday, Citi said it was 'following regulatory developments, recent Executive Orders and federal legislation.' In 2018, Citi said it would ban banking services to businesses that sold firearms to those under 21, those who didn't pass a background check, or sold bump stocks (used by the gunman in the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas) or high-capacity magazines. The policy applied to small businesses, commercial and institutional clients, and credit card partners, but did not restrict how individual customers used their cards. Big banks have recently caught the ire of the president as well as the crypto industry. In January at the annual World Economic Forum, President Donald Trump scolded Brian Moynihan, the CEO of Bank of America. 'You've done a fantastic job, but I hope you start opening your bank to conservatives, because many conservatives complain that the banks are not allowing them to do business within the bank,' Trump said. 'You and Jamie and everybody… What you're doing is wrong,' referring to JPMorgan Chase head Jamie Dimon. Citigroup also announced on Tuesday that it will update its employee Code of Conduct and its external Global Financial Access Policy 'to clearly state that we do not discriminate on the basis of political affiliation in the same way we are clear that we do not discriminate on the basis of other traits such as race and religion.' 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
Washington Post
28 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Trump promises to hike steel and aluminum tariffs to 50% starting Wednesday. Here's what we know
NEW YORK — U.S. President Donald Trump has promised to hike nearly all of his tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum to a punishing 50% on Wednesday, a move that would hammer businesses from automakers to home builders, and likely push up prices for consumers. Foreign-made steel and aluminum is used in household products like soup cans and paper clips as well as big-ticket items like a stainless-steel refrigerators and cars. Economists warn that the latest tariffs will significantly squeeze the wallets of both companies and shoppers alike.
