FIFTH CIRCUIT DECLINES TO REVIVE CRIMINAL CASE AGAINST BOEING
May 28, 2026
Eckert Seamans has prepared the information in this update for educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice nor substitute for legal advice. Neither your receipt of information from this website nor your use of this website to contact Eckert Seamans or one of its attorneys creates an attorney-client relationship, as the firm may, for example, already represent another party involved in your matter. Accordingly, you should not provide confidential information to Eckert Seamans. Persons seeking legal advice should consult a licensed professional attorney in their state. The firm’s Terms of Use, Legal Notice, and Disclaimer detailed herein are expressly incorporated into the Aviation Regulatory Update.
On March 31, 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion in which a three-judge panel declined to reopen the criminal case against Boeing for conspiring to defraud regulators in connection with the FAA’s evaluation of Boeing’s 737 MAX aircraft. By way of brief background, the families of Boeing 737 MAX crash victims who opposed a lower court’s dismissal of the criminal case filed petitions for a writ of mandamus with the Fifth Circuit in November 2025, and oral arguments were subsequently held in February 2026. Pursuant to the federal Crime Victims’ Rights Act, the families requested that the Fifth Circuit remand the case to the district court over allegations that the U.S. Department of Justice and Boeing “illegally negotiated a deferred prosecution agreement” in violation of the Act’s statutory protections, including the families’ rights to confer, to be treated with fairness, and to receive timely notice of any deferred prosecution agreement.
The Fifth Circuit ultimately denied the petitions for a writ of mandamus because the three-judge panel found that DOJ did not violate the families’ rights under the statute. To the contrary, the Fifth Circuit reasoned that DOJ treated the families with the “fairness” required by the Act and meaningfully conferred with them before entering into the non-prosecution agreement with Boeing on May 29, 2025. There was also no evidence within the record to indicate that DOJ failed to adequately confer with the families, nor did federal prosecutors mislead them about the non-prosecution agreement. Without such evidence, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the lower court ruling that government attorneys did not violate the Act and therefore the decision foreclosed the families’ opportunity to revive the criminal prosecution.
This Aviation Blog Post is intended to keep readers current on developments in the law. It is not intended to be legal advice. If you have any questions, please contact Evelyn Sahr at 202.659.6622 or esahr@eckertseamans.com; Drew Derco at 202.659.6665 or dderco@eckertseamans.com; Tyler Myers at 202.659.6642 or trmyers@eckertseamans.com, or any other attorney at Eckert Seamans with whom you have been working.
Share This Post
Authors
