Jose Luis Magana/AP Photo
Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco speaks during a news conference announcing the prosecution of Ticketmaster at the Department of Justice headquarters on May 23, 2024.
As the Justice Department faces a July 7 deadline to decide whether to file criminal charges against Boeing for breaking the terms of its 2021 deferred prosecution agreement over the 737 MAX crashes, all indications are that federal prosecutors will offer Boeing a plea deal.
Lower-level prosecutors recommended the filing of criminal charges, according to Reuters, and Bloomberg reported that DOJ would attempt to squeeze a guilty plea out of the company. But lower-level prosecutors can be overruled by the higher-ups. An even if Boeing agrees to a guilty plea, that could presumably be folded into the deal as an admission of wrongdoing. The consequences for that admission would not carry what would commonly be considered criminal penalties; certainly it would not impact the liberties of any Boeing executive.
According to multiple reports of a phone call Sunday afternoon with families who lost loved ones in one of the MAX crashes, Boeing would be fined $244 million, required to invest in further safety measures, hold a meeting with victims’ families, and receive oversight from an independent monitor for three years. Boeing would get to handpick the monitor, and technically speaking it already has oversight in the form of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), whose inspectors are positioned throughout Boeing factories.
“The 737 MAX families vigorously oppose the shameful new sweetheart deal between Boeing and the Department of Justice,” said Erin Applebaum, who represents 34 families, in a statement. Applebaum threatened to go to court to block the deal, and added, “When there is inevitably another Boeing crash and DOJ seeks to assign blame, they will have nowhere else to look but in the mirror.” The characterization of a sweetheart deal has also been articulated by other attorneys for the families, who said that the statement of facts attached to the 2021 agreement was “whitewashed,” allowing Boeing to claim it was not responsible for the tragedies.
As this has unfolded, some have pointed the finger at one of the leading decision-makers inside the Justice Department, particularly on the question of whether to impose criminal charges. As The Lever has reported, Lisa Monaco, number two at DOJ, had Boeing as a client while at the policy consulting shop West Exec Advisors during the Trump presidency.
The American Economic Liberties Project, Demand Progress Education Fund, and the Revolving Door Project are now highlighting what they see as a conflict of interest. In a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, the three groups demand that Monaco recuse herself from any deliberations over Boeing, and that DOJ file criminal charges “rather than let a repeat offender off the hook.”
Corporate prosecutions have taken a nosedive during Garland and Monaco’s tenure at DOJ, falling to a 25-year low in 2021 and ticking up only modestly in 2022 and 2023.
The 2021 deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) settled allegations that Boeing fraudulently withheld information from the FAA about changing its MCAS software, which malfunctioned in the two MAX crashes. DOJ has already determined that Boeing did not comply with the DPA. Boeing has publicly denied this, though the groups point to high-profile situations like the Alaska Airlines flight that lost a door plug. Subsequent investigations found repair work that was not documented, which DOJ has concluded breaks the pledge to put procedures in place to prevent undisclosed safety measures.
That’s what created this July 7 deadline for DOJ to file a case or settle with Boeing. “A decision of this significance, which could affect the very financial sustainability of a $77 billion company with 170,000 employees, must be made with complete impartiality,” the three groups write. “Unfortunately, Deputy Attorney General Monaco’s personal connections to Boeing … make her an unsuitable participant in the deliberations.”
A Justice Department spokesperson told the Prospect that Monaco “provided a limited number of briefings” about the COVID-19 pandemic to Boeing while at WestExec. “This limited prior consulting work has no relevance to aviation safety or the ongoing case,” the spokesperson said.
Monaco is responsible for overseeing the entire Justice Department and in particular setting enforcement priorities. The Justice Department did not say specifically whether Monaco was involved in the Boeing case and does not comment on internal deliberations as a rule. But it said that Monaco “is complying with all legal, policy, and ethical requirements,” and that department rules stipulate that officials recuse from cases involving former clients for only two years; Monaco “has been in her role for over three years now,” the spokesperson said. The full statement is below.
Corporate prosecutions have taken a nosedive during Garland and Monaco’s tenure at DOJ, falling to a 25-year low in 2021 and ticking up only modestly in 2022 and 2023. The majority of the corporations DOJ prosecuted last year had 50 or fewer employees.
While the letter acknowledges the risks of criminal charges to the only major American airplane manufacturer, it says those risks must be measured against the credibility and integrity of the justice system. And it says that impartial law enforcers must weigh those risks.
Finally, it makes the case for holding Boeing accountable. “Treating Boeing leniently did not serve the public interest the first time around, and it makes even less sense now,” the letter concludes. “Without real accountability—including personal consequences for executives—Boeing will not be sufficiently motivated to actually fix the underlying corporate governance problems that have caused it to focus more on financial engineering than making safe aircraft.”
Here is the full statement from the Department of Justice spokesperson:
Before returning to government service, Deputy AG Monaco provided a limited number of briefings to the company on the COVID pandemic, and this limited prior consulting work has no relevance to aviation safety or the ongoing case. While the Department does not comment on internal deliberations—including the details of who reviews or authorizes corporate criminal resolutions—I can assure you that the Deputy AG is complying with all legal, policy, and ethical requirements, as she does in every matter.
I would also remind you that Administration appointees must forego participation in particular matters involving specific parties relating to a former client for a two-year period. The Deputy AG has been in her role for over three years now.
