The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
The Possible Penalties for Boeing's Crime of Concealing 737 MAX Safety Issues
My letter to the Justice Department lays out the possibilities, including a possible fine of $24,780,000,000
As noted in earlier posts here, here, and here, I represent some of the families who lost loved ones in the crashes of two Boeing 737 MAX aircraft. This short post provides a quick update on the latest developments, as in the next few weeks the Justice Department will make important decisions about Boeing's prosecution. My families seek aggressive prosecution of what has properly been described as the deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history.
Here's a quick recap of the current situation: Following a criminal investigation by the Justice Department, in January 2021, Boeing admitted that it concealed safety issues with the aircraft from the FAA—and negotiated a secret deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) apparently resolving its criminal liability for its deadly conspiracy to defraud the FAA. In the DPA, Boeing committed to undertaking efforts to improve its corporate compliance with regulatory and safety obligations.
But since then, in October 2022, the district judge handling the case (Judge Reed O'Connor in the Northern District of Texas) has concluded that the 346 families who lost family members in the crashes represent "crime victims" and that their Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) rights were violated by the Department secretly negotiating the DPA.
And then last month, the Justice Department concluded that Boeing had breached its commitment in the DPA to improve safety at the company—a conclusion that seems supported by an almost daily barrage of news about safety concerns at Boeing and with its aircraft. The Department is currently considering how to move forward with prosecuting Boeing and has asked the victims' families for their views.
Notably, a criminal charge has already been filed against Boeing in the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas. That pending charge alleges that Boeing conspired to defraud the FAA about safety issues associated with the 737 MAX. Under the DPA, the criminal prosecution of Boeing was deferred. But now that Boeing has breached its DPA obligations, the pending criminal charge against it needs to move forward through the ordinary criminal justice process.
Under the DPA, the Speedy Trial clock for proceeding with the conspiracy charge against Boeing was tolled until July 7, 2024. So it seems likely that the Justice Department—and Judge O'Connor—will want to have a schedule in place for moving forward with the case before that date.
Earlier today, I sent the linked 32-page letter to the Department, outlining the position of my families as to how the Department's prosecution of Boeing should proceed. Here are some of the opening paragraphs from the letter, which seeks aggressive prosecution of Boeing:
As explained in more detail below, Boeing's crime produced losses in excess of $12,390,000,000, meaning the maximum possible fine is $24,780,000,000. Because Boeing's crime is the deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history, a maximum fine of more than $24 billion is legally justified and clearly appropriate, although it might be partially suspended if funds that would otherwise be paid are devoted to appropriate quality control and safety measures. This letter explains the calculations underlying this conclusion and further sets out the families' views more broadly on how Boeing and responsible corporate executives should be prosecuted.
In overview, as explained in greater detail in my letter to you of June 4, the families continue to believe the appropriate action now is an aggressive criminal prosecution of The Boeing Company. The Justice Department should promptly ask Judge O'Connor to schedule a date for a jury trial within seventy days of July 7, 2024—as required by the Speedy Trial Act. In requesting a quick jury trial, the Department should note the families' right, as embodied in the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), to proceedings free from unreasonable delay. If Boeing requests plea negotiations, the
Department should not offer Boeing any concessions. If the Department seems likely to reach a tentative agreement with Boeing on plea concessions, the families request an opportunity to exercise their right under the CVRA to confer with the Department about any possible concessions. See 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(5) & (9).
Once Boeing is convicted at trial (or by pleading guilty "straight up" to the pending conspiracy charge), then it should receive a sentence reflecting its guilt for the deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history. It should be fined the maximum—$24,780,000,000—with perhaps $14,000,000,000 to $22,000,0000,000 of the fine suspended on the condition that Boeing devote those suspended funds to an independent corporate monitor and related improvements in compliance and safety programs as identified below. And Boeing's Board of Directors should be ordered to meet with the families.
The families also believe that the Department should launch criminal prosecutions of the responsible corporate officials at Boeing at the time of the two crashes, including in particular former Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg. Because time is of the essence to avoid any statute of limitations from running, the Department should begin these prosecutions promptly.
My letter today to DOJ follows on the heels of yesterday's high-publicized hearing by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. During the hearing, Boeing's CEO Dave Calhoun apologized to the families who lost loved one in the crashes. Calhoun was grilled by Senator Blumenthal (D-CT) and Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO). Senator Blumenthal called for prosecution of the Boeing executives who were responsible for the conspiracy, while Senator Hawley called for current CEO Calhoun's resignation. The video of the hearing is well worth watching, as it demonstrates bipartisan concensus that something is terribly wrong at Boeing.
I hope that the Justice Department will read my letter carefully and follow the steps that I recommend. Right now, Boeing's safety problems are harming its status as one of America's (formerly) great companies. A criminal prosecution that sets Boeing on a new and improved course is an important reform—for Boeing to restore its reputation.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Hey, Google. Set a news alert for "Paul Cassell suicide."
Good luck out there. Man, as an employee in Quality Assurance for 20ish years, I'm sure glad I've never worked for Boeing.
"Under the DPA, the Speedy Trial clock for proceeding with the conspiracy charge against Boeing was tolled until July 7, 2024. So it seems likely that the Justice Department–and Judge O'Connor–will want to have a schedule in place for moving forward with the case before that date."
Well, they will assuming the fix isn't in. Boeing management seem to be a lot more comfortable with bribery and convenient deadly accidents than they are with fixing technical issues.
Boeing management seem to be a lot more comfortable with bribery and convenient deadly accidents than they are with fixing technical issues.
Easier, and, they had hoped, cheaper.
I feel for the families, but does the lawyer get 30% of $24 billion?
Hi Krayt,
1. I'm handling the case pro bono.
2. In any event, the $24 billion is a criminal FINE, paid to the U.S. Treasury. That is not the kind of recovery for a client that would entitle a lawyer to a contingency fee.
I hope that helps clarify the situation.
Thank you.
The corrupt dirtbags at the DOJ who did the secret agreement should be prosecuted too.
Every single thing about the Boeing story makes me so sad.
Boeing used to be known for its adherence to excellence, and to its belief that engineering was the most important thing.
Ugh.
I think that there are a lot of people that remember the old Boeing and think that the McDonnell Douglas merger is the worst thing to ever happen to it. It took a while for it to truly destroy the company, but it did.
Agreed. I readily admit my biases, I'm an engineer who greatly respected the Boeing that was.
I don't get misty-eyed about business, but building a self-perpetuating company culture that consistently produces world-class results making complicated, safety-critical things is really, really hard. And while it may not be prosecutable, murdering that may have been the biggest crime of all.
I certainly don't mean to downplay the suffering of the families Cassell represents - I just mean there's a disturbingly high chance the Boeing body count could go up at any time.
While the merger with McDonnell Douglas was a proximate cause, I'd say the more critical cause was the rise of business schools teaching a very dysfunctional approach to industry as just a money game, and not a productive enterprise.
Leading to the sort of "just too late" inventory systems that made so many businesses vulnerable to disruptions in shipping, for instance.
Brett - Your comment mirrors in many respects what one of the two pilots mentioned to me a few months ago. As the pilot stated, the shift to manufacturing large sections of planes through third party manufacturers was done for cost saving reasons, with a resulting loss of quality control.
That being said - an interesting blurb I recall regarding the assembly error on the door plug that flew off was that film showed they did not install a couple of bolts (rivets ?). That blurb implied that many of the steps in the manufacturing process was video taped. would be curious if that statement was correct.
I believe they recovered the door plug and found that it was missing the bolts. There's ways to tell if bolts were ripped out or never there because the former does damage to the hole while the latter doesn't.
FWIW - I have a couple 737 pilots as clients.
One pilot commented that Boeings quality control problems stem for the Shift to outsourcing significant manufacturing to third parties. I cant voucher for the validity of that pilots assessment. just noting his observation.
A second pilot, also former f15 pilot commented to me to the effect that the two crashes was combination of poor pilot training and plain pilot error. This pilot had been involved in considerable pilot training, noting that standards for some of the smaller foreign airlines was significantly lower than US and European standards.
Note that I am not discounting the possibility of design flaws or software flaws, just noting that putting 100% blame on the design flaws is probably a stretch.
The difference between US airline pilots and everywhere else is that US pilots have to have a whole lot more hours before they can become an airline pilot.
That said, Ethiopian Air is fairly reputable, and I believe that the pilot got it right and switched off the MCAS, but wasn't able to manually adjust the trim or something.
You want to talk scary, Russian airlines...
Re pilot error: It's true that a sufficiently skilled pilot may be able to recover from a system failure, but if an aircraft is designed in such a way that only an exceptional pilot can safely fly it then that is a design flaw, just as it would be if a family sedan were designed that way.
Re poor training: One of the allegations against Boeing was that it concealed from pilots the existence of MCAS, claiming it didn't require additional training although it introduced behavior different from ordinary trim runaway that pilots were trained for.
voize - I am not disputing your comment, only relaying what the two pilots stated to me.
Prof. Cassell,
With respect, I’m a little curious about your intentions here.
You have to know that there’s no possibility of this case going to trial in the next three months, that the prosecutors would be acting grossly irresponsibly if they could somehow induce the judge to abuse his discretion to make it happen, and that it would be absurd to try to do that while also prosecuting individual executives. Likewise, if Boeing offered to plead guilty in exchange for capping the fine at, say, $20,000,000,000, I have to imagine that the government would accept that (as they probably should!). So if all that asserting your CVRA rights accomplishes is to give the victims the opportunity to ask the prosecutors to do things they can’t, won’t, and shouldn’t do, what was the point of all this?
When all you have is CVRA rights, then every problem demands CVRA rights.
Its a strange niche, especially since he left the bench to focus on it.
Worse than Bhopal (toxic chemical leak)? Monongah (mining)? Texas City (ship explosion)? Johnstown Flood?
Or those Weekend At Bernie's stage plays you call a "Stones Concert"?
Inspirational
More inspirational.
That's at the end of a two-hour performance in which Jagger covers a 70-yard-wide stage (and 40-yard-long catwalk).
If you can get to Denver, Chicago, Vancouver, Los Angeles, or San Francisco, do it!
Corporations don't pay fines, they just collect them on consumers' behalf -- esp. when there are only two players, Airbus and Boeing, on the field and each is surrounded by governments wanting to protect "their" airline manufacturer so there's little chance of either going out of business.
If that $24B fine were levied it would be paid, ultimately, by consumers - mostly plane passengers but perhaps insurance consumers as well. Even passengers on airlines that exclusively use Airbus planes will also pay because with Boeing having to price their planes and services to cover the fines, Airbus can extract higher prices for their from airlines.
Agreed. The officers need serious jail time.
At least bankrupting fines.
I'm not so sure.
I mean, if Boeing can just raise their prices to recover the fine, why aren't they already charging more. Why are they leaving $24B on the table?
It's risky to raise your prices. However when you effectively have to due to having to pay a fine/judgement that is almost four years of your gross profit you will likely take that risk as the alternative is grim.
The problem with that reasoning is that you already are, presumably, charging prices that maximize profits.
So raising them won't get you the extra revenue you need to cover the fine. In fact, unless your pricing is already wrong, it will cost you money.
Again, if Boeing could grab $24B out of the air by raising prices why hasn't it already done so, without having any fine to cover?
The fine, whatever it is, will be paid by the shareholders. I tend to agree with B.L. that it is the execs who need to be hit hard. That often doesn't happen in these cases.
Arguably, the $24B would offset $24B that would otherwise have to be collected from other Americans, and would be paid by the Boeing stockholders.
In theory....
About one third of Boeing's revenue is from U.S. government sales.
Neither crash happened in the US. No US Carriers are involved. I believe a bird strike that destroyed an AOA sensor on one aircraft that contributed to the crash. So why is this trial being held in the US? Trust me, I'm not a fan of Boeing. I'm also not a fan of their Unions. In 1989 Boeing got with the Union and agreed to pull all of the work for the 747-400 back in house, if the Union gave them a labor dispute. The labor dispute gave Boeing a 2 year extension of the delivery dates for aircraft that they were about to be penalized for. This bankrupted a Company that I was working for at the time.
"So why is this trial being held in the US?"
Because the charges against Boeing are not directly about the crashes.
Boeing is charged with defrauding the US FAA by withholding and/or falsifying safety data for the 737 Max.
"Because the charges against Boeing are not directly about the crashes."
Really? Then why is the Author of this post representing the families of the crash victims?
How is this different from the Donald Trump empire?
Why not do what New York is trying to do — seize Boeing and have a fire sale.
Of course Boeing is a major DOD contractor, so it'd have to be a restricted fire sale.
Don't do that until they bring their spaceship back, please.
Prof. Cassell made it to The Hill:
https://thehill.com/business/4730056-boeing-crash-families-urge-criminal-prosecution/
Not much different that making it to the Volokh Conspiracy these days. Not quite the zombie publication Newsweek has become . . . but close.
I saw his name on the PBS Newshour too.
The FAA is unconstitutional and its freedom depriving labyrinth of regulations must be eliminated.
Free markets FTW baby!!
The FAA is an interesting organization. It has a dual mission. One mission is to regulate Civil Aviation in the US. The other mission is to promote Civil Aviation in the US.
Sometimes these missions go against each other.
The largest problem that the FAA has is a lack of knowledge by it's employees. It used to be that the majority of them were aviation professionals. Now with Public Sector Unions that isn't the case. Positions are assigned by seniority, not capability.
That statement isn't mine. It came from a guy that I used to work with when I volunteered at an aviation museum restoring old aircraft. Milt had retired from the FAA about ten years before I met him.
The FAA unionized four years after it was created. I don't think unions are the issue. You should tell Milt to get a cognitive exam - his memory is flaky.
How would (laissez-faire) free markets have prevented the Boeing disasters?
My families seek aggressive prosecution of what has properly been described as the deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history.
No intent to minimize the crimes of Boeing's management, but that is not even close to correct. To the items mentioned by Kirkland above, consider also the tobacco health coverups, and the asbestos health coverups.
The reference to the "deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history" comes from Judge O'Connor's decision in Feburary 2023. Here is the footnote that Judge O'Conno attached to that statement: Representatives’ Supp. Remedies Reply 9, 9 n.10, ECF No. 140 (“According to Bloomberg Law, PG&E’s 2020 plea to 84 separate involuntary manslaughter counts in connection with a wildfire in Paradise, California, was ‘the deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history.’ Bloomberg Law, Deadliest Corporate Crime in the U.S. Will End with 84 Guilty Pleas (June 15, 2020). With this Court’s recent finding that ‘but for Boeing’s criminal conspiracy 346 people would not have lost their lives in the crashes’ (Dkt. 116), this case has tragically become the deadliest corporate crime in our nation’s history.”).
In some of the other cases that are being mentioned, there has not been a judicial finding of a link between a proven crime and the resulting deaths.
Judge O'Connor sounds like an uninformed dope.
What was the Ford Pinto death toll?
Hi Dr. Ed,
The Pinto case -- According to Wikipedia, in 1978 Indiana indicted Ford for three counts of reckless homicide in connection with the deaths of three teenage girls killed in a rear-end collision. The case was the first time a corporation faced criminal charges for a defective product - and the first time a corporation was charged with homicide. Indiana v. Ford Motor Co. (1978). Ford was found not guilty.
Mother Jones said 500-900 -- see https://www.motherjones.com/politics/1977/09/pinto-madness/
It was where they put the gas tank -- and 20 years later, Ford did it again with the Crown Vic although not as badly.
See also https://www.motortrend.com/features/ford-pinto/
The Mother Jones story reminds me of a popular quote from Fight Club:
According to a piece in Rolling Stone, author Chuck Palahniuk used to drive a Ford Pinto.
Ford allegedly reduced that to writing in a memo.
They could have put a 1 lb $1 piece of plastic on the differential so it didn't puncture it in a crash, or spent $5 for a bladder inside the gas tank but didn't want to.
>a maximum fine of more than $24 billion is legally justified and clearly appropriate
Not sure how a fine of that magnitude would help anyone actually harmed here: not your clients, nor the flying public, nor the airplane customers. It won't even change corporate behavior, as this fine would come due years after the actual decisions were made (and relevant bonuses paid).
The only thing that will change such corporate behavior is the possibility of jail time for the executives.
Corporations can only act through their employees, and the one employee prosecuted for these so called criminal acts was acquitted after two hours of jury deliberations.
I'm quite certain that Kanawha and New River Power Co., a subsidiary of Union Carbide killed many more U.S. citizens from silicosis when it dug the Hawks Nest tunnel under Gauley Mountain to divert the New River through the tunnel rather than around the mountain as a hydroelectric power source knowing that the mountain under which the tunnel was dug was largely made of silica. Workers were forced to dig at gunpoint with no protection from silica while supervisors wore masks. Although no precise death count is known, estimates are that over 1,000 largely black workers died from silicosis.
Hi Michael,
A terrible "industrial disaster" - as others have described it. I don't know the details, other than on a quick Google search, it appears clear that no criminal charges were ever filed.
Why don't you respond to my comment about the acquittal?
Hi Tom - I thought I'd covered the Forkner point sufficiently in my letter. There I wrote:
In this case, sadly, the prosecutors have not acted boldly, but timidly. This timidity appears likely to have come from the direction of the political appointees. See Andrew Tangel & Dave Michaels, Inside DOJ’s Wrenching Decision on Whether to Prosecute Boeing, WALL ST. J. (June 17, 2024) (“Some prosecutors wanted to probe whether the company or its executives defrauded investors by denying problems with the 737 MAX’s safety, according to people familiar with the discussions, but supervisors told them to focus on Mark Forkner, a pilot in charge of dealing with certain Federal Aviation Administration officials on training matters.”).
Independent observers agree with the families that responsible senior executives within Boeing at the time of its conspiracy crime should be prosecuted. During yesterday’s Senate hearing, Senator Blumenthal stated, “In my view, and I said it at the time [of the DPA], individuals should be held accountable for those [346] deaths.” Senator Blumenthal reiterated: “I’m saying … to the Department of Justice individuals should be held accountable because that’s the only way that deterrence works.”
As I mentioned at the May 31 meeting, it is clear that the Department possesses sufficient evidence to pursue prosecution of individuals for the same § 371 conspiracy that is charged against the Company. The idea that just two mid-level pilots alone executed the vast, multi-year conspiracy is far-fetched—which (among other things) helps to explain the Department’s botched prosecution of Mark Forkner. Now that Forkner’s charges have been resolved, the Department should immediately question him (and other former Boeing employees) to determine the full scope of the conspiracy.
When does the statute of limitations run out for individual defendants?
Not a U.S. accident so outside the scope of the original claim, Union Carbide paid about half a billion dollars to avoid criminal liability for Bhopal.
Boeing's latest was an engine exploding on takeoff from Houston.
https://abc13.com/houston-flight-united-engine-catches-fire-out-of-iah-boeing-737/14497766/
Bleep happens, but it seems to be happening a lot to Boeing....
NB: I know that Boeing doesn't make jet engines -- it's GE or Rolls Royce or a few other folk. But still...
But still nothing. Not only does Boeing *not* make the engines, they don't maintain them, the airlines do. And the engine didn't explode, nor did it "catch fire", at least from the video evidence. It looks like a compressor stall, which is an engine malfunction that the crew deals with by pulling back the power on the engine until it stops experiencing the compressor stalls and then returning to land for maintenance.
I would prefer you skip the fine entirely in exchange for a prosecution focus that brings criminal charges against these cynical executives and has them actually serve time behind bars.
The problem is that, by some estimates, Boeing alone accounts for about 1% of US GDP. Boeing's Board of Directors and the management they've installed have driven the company to edge of extinction, so that's not your fault. But just in case Boeing can be saved, perhaps you don't want your $24G to be the last straw that pushes them over that edge.
The value is not in the corporation as a corporation but in its operations.
You could imagine...
Boeing is guilty of fraud. The fine is 10 figures. The company is disbarred from federal contracts. The military division is sold to Northrop Grumman for a song. The civilian side is not quite bankrupt but shares are down 90%. The probation officer suggests that things will go easier for the company if the management team resigns. The manufacturing jobs can remain.
This won't happen because institutional investors will complain.
I understand that the sum of 24.78 billion dollars is quite impressive, but I think criminal prosecution is also necessary. I don't know, maybe we should demand a death penalty for them. They should answer for this with more than just money. The article on https://papersowl.com/examples/death-penalty/ says that such a punishment does not reduce crime. But at the same time, you can't just pay off, resign and pretend that no one died. They collectively concealed the problems with the safety of the plane, and deliberately sent people to their deaths.