Boeing would avoid guilty plea, prosecution over 737 Max crashes in possible DOJ deal

Boeing’s Potential DOJ Deal Sparks Outrage: No Guilty Plea for 737 Max Crashes
In a stunning development, Boeing is on the verge of sidestepping a guilty plea and criminal prosecution for its role in two deadly 737 Max crashes that claimed 346 lives in 2018 and 2019. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is reportedly considering a non-criminal settlement, a move that has ignited fury among victims’ families and raised questions about corporate accountability. As the aerospace giant navigates this legal pivot, Noyzy News dives into the details of this controversial deal, its implications, and the fierce backlash it has provoked.
A Deal to Avoid the Courtroom
Boeing initially agreed in July 2024 to plead guilty to a criminal fraud conspiracy charge for misleading regulators about the 737 Max’s flight control system. The crashes—Lion Air Flight 610 in Indonesia and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302—exposed flaws in the plane’s Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS), which Boeing failed to disclose to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). A federal judge rejected that plea deal in December 2024, citing concerns over a diversity and inclusion clause and the selection process for an independent monitor.
Now, the DOJ is exploring a non-prosecution agreement that would allow Boeing to avoid a trial scheduled for June 23, 2025. This deal, still pending judicial approval, includes a $444.5 million fund for crash victims’ families but stops short of branding Boeing a convicted felon. Prosecutors informed victims’ families of this shift during a meeting on May 16, 2025, noting that Boeing is no longer willing to plead guilty and is prepared to risk a trial.
Why the Change in Course?

Judicial Rejection: The December 2024 rejection of the initial plea deal forced Boeing and the DOJ to renegotiate, with the company now seeking lighter consequences.
Political Shift: The case has spilled into the Trump administration, which has overhauled the DOJ, potentially influencing the push for a non-criminal resolution.
Corporate Strategy: Boeing’s reluctance to accept a felony conviction stems from the potential for severe reputational and financial damage, including restrictions on government contracts.

Victims’ Families Cry Foul
The prospect of Boeing evading criminal prosecution has been met with outrage from families who lost loved ones in the crashes. Attorneys representing the families have called the proposed deal “morally repugnant” and a betrayal of justice. “This isn’t justice,” said Erin Applebaum of Kreindler & Kreindler, emphasizing the families’ determination to fight the agreement in court.
Sanjiv Singh, an attorney for 16 victims of the 2018 Lion Air crash, described the settlement as feeling “like a bribe,” arguing it fails to hold Boeing accountable for its actions. Families have long criticized earlier plea deals as “sweetheart” arrangements, pointing to the relatively modest $243.6 million fine—equivalent to the cost of a few 737 Max planes—as insufficient punishment for the loss of 346 lives.
A History of Leniency?
This isn’t the first time Boeing has faced accusations of leniency. In 2021, the company entered a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) with the DOJ, shielding it from criminal charges if it complied with safety and compliance reforms. However, a January 2024 incident, where a door plug blew out on an Alaska Airlines 737 Max 9, revealed ongoing safety lapses, prompting the DOJ to find Boeing in violation of the DPA.
The families’ frustration is compounded by the DOJ’s admission that it lacks evidence to directly link Boeing’s deception to the crashes, limiting the charges to conspiracy to defraud the FAA. This has left many feeling that the legal system is prioritizing corporate interests over human lives.
What’s at Stake for Boeing?
For Boeing, avoiding a guilty plea could be a lifeline. A felony conviction could jeopardize its ability to secure lucrative government contracts, further straining a company already grappling with a tarnished reputation and financial challenges. The 737 Max crashes led to a 20-month grounding of the fleet, billions in losses, and ongoing regulatory scrutiny. The Alaska Airlines incident and a production cap imposed by the FAA have only deepened Boeing’s woes.
The proposed settlement would require Boeing to invest in safety and compliance programs and accept oversight by an independent monitor. However, critics argue these measures are inadequate without a public trial to expose the full extent of Boeing’s misconduct.
Broader Implications for Corporate Accountability
This case raises thorny questions about how the justice system handles corporate wrongdoing. If approved, the non-prosecution agreement could set a precedent for other companies to negotiate their way out of serious charges, particularly under political administrations favorable to business interests. Posts on X reflect public skepticism, with some users calling fines a “price of doing business” rather than true accountability.
For the aviation industry, the deal could erode public trust in Boeing and the regulatory process. Passengers may question the safety of flying on 737 Max jets, even as Boeing insists it has made significant safety improvements.
A Fight Far From Over
As the DOJ and Boeing await a judge’s decision, the families of the 737 Max crash victims remain steadfast in their pursuit of justice. Their legal battle underscores a broader demand for transparency and accountability from one of America’s largest corporations. While Boeing may avoid a guilty plea for now, the court of public opinion is far less forgiving.
This unfolding saga is a stark reminder that the cost of corporate missteps is measured not just in dollars but in human lives. For the families, no settlement can replace their loved ones—but a public reckoning might bring them closer to closure.