FAMILIES OF BOEING CRASH VICTIMS ASK FIFTH CIRCUIT TO REVIVE DISMISSED CRIMINAL CASE. (PHOTO).

 Families of Boeing crash victims ask Fifth Circuit to revive dismissed criminal case

The families of victims from two Boeing 737 Max crashes asked a Fifth Circuit appeals panel on Thursday to overturn a federal agreement that dismissed a criminal fraud case against the aerospace company, arguing their rights as crime victims were not properly considered.

The case stemmed from prosecutors’ allegations that Boeing misled federal regulators about the Max’s flight control system, a factor in two deadly crashes in 2018 and 2019 that killed 346 people. In 2025, the government reached a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) with Boeing, dismissing the case in exchange for more than $1.1 billion in fines, victim compensation, and safety improvements. Some families objected, and U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor had expressed concerns that allowing Boeing to choose its own compliance consultant failed to ensure accountability for public safety. Despite this, O’Connor approved the dismissal, citing prosecutorial discretion and compliance with the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA).

Attorney Paul Cassell, representing 31 families, told the appellate panel that the government violated the CVRA because it did not consult with victims before entering a prior deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) in 2021. Cassell argued that elements of the NPA, including the sentencing guidelines and payment calculations, were influenced by the DPA, meaning families’ input came too late to affect the outcome. He asked the court to vacate the NPA or remand the case to O’Connor so the families could show the agreement was tainted by the earlier DPA.

Justice Department attorney Connor Winn countered that references to the DPA in the NPA were largely factual and that Boeing’s breach of the DPA reset the case. He said the government could have pursued any charges or sentences, and had consulted with families after entering the NPA. Winn emphasized that the CVRA provides victims a voice but not a veto, and that courts do not have authority to overturn an NPA, which is an agreement between the executive branch and the defendant. He noted that if the government violated victims’ rights, courts could refer prosecutors for disciplinary review, but could not invalidate the agreement without violating the separation of powers.

The three-judge panel hearing the case included U.S. Circuit Judges Stuart Duncan, Leslie Southwick, and Kurt Engelhardt.