Justice delayed is an understatement when talking about the September 11 attacks. A military judge just scheduled the trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and three co-defendants for June 5, 2028. Think about that timeline. It means victims' families will wait more than a quarter of a century for a courtroom verdict.
Air Force Lt. Col. Michael Schrama tossed out the prosecution's wish for a January 2027 start. He knew reality required more breathing room. The legal architecture holding this case together is fragile, deeply contested, and weighed down by decades of procedural quicksand. If you are wondering why it takes over twenty years to get an alleged terrorist to trial, the answer involves a toxic mix of secret CIA interrogations, overturned plea deals, and a military commission system that struggles under the weight of capital charges.
The Long Road to a 2028 Courtroom
The numbers tell a staggering story of administrative paralysis. Mohammed was captured in Pakistan back in 2003. He arrived at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in 2006 after bouncing through a network of covert CIA black sites. Charges arrived later, and pre-trial hearings stretched across administrations, defense secretaries, and changing judges without ever reaching an opening statement.
Prosecutors pushed for a quick start in early 2027, hoping to wrap up the endless loop of preliminary motions. Judge Schrama rejected that timeline. He set a rigid scheduling order that outlines specific milestones leading up to June 2028. Jury selection—involving military commission members—will kick off on June 5, 2028. Opening statements will follow thirty days after the panel is seated.
This schedule leaves zero room for error. The judge noted that absent extraordinary cause, extensions will not happen. Both sides must stick to strict deadlines for motions, evidence presentation, and rebuttals.
Why the Delay Keeps Happening
People always ask why this case moves at a snail's pace. The primary roadblock centers on torture and classified evidence.
Before arriving at Guantanamo, the defendants endured severe interrogation techniques at CIA black sites. Defense attorneys have argued for years that this abuse tainted the entire prosecution. Much of the evidence collected is tangled up in legal battles over national security classifications. The infamous 2014 Senate torture report documented the extent of the abuse, giving defense teams ammunition to challenge every piece of government evidence.
Adding to the chaos, plea deals have swung back and forth like a pendulum. Agreements that would have taken the death penalty off the table in exchange for guilty pleas have faced intense political backlash and legal reversals. Victims' advocacy groups, such as 9/11 Families United, have fiercely opposed deals that avoid capital punishment, arguing that true accountability requires a full trial.
What Happens Next in the Military Commission
The upcoming trial will feature Mohammed alongside co-defendants Walid bin Attash, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali, and Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi. They face nearly 3,000 individual counts of murder in violation of the law of war, alongside charges of terrorism and hijacking.
The trial format inside the military commission system follows distinct rules compared to federal civilian courts:
- The jury consists entirely of military service members.
- Defendants can choose to defer opening statements until prosecutors finish presenting their case-in-chief.
- Defense presentation of evidence begins sixty days after the prosecution rests.
- The proceedings conclude with a distinct sentencing phase where the death penalty remains on the table for the remaining defendants.
The 2028 date means the legal battle over September 11 will stretch deep into the future, keeping Guantanamo Bay's military commissions in the global spotlight long after most post-9/11 operations have ended.
