Wire flash
Federal appeals court restores Bowe Bergdahl's conviction, overturns 2023 ruling
Editorial responsibility
- No named human review is recorded for this page.
- Source reporting is collected, normalized, translated or condensed automatically when needed.
- Automatically published source-backed update
A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., overturned a 2023 civilian court ruling that had vacated the court-martial conviction of former U.S. Army soldier Bowe Bergdahl. The three-judge panel ruled on September 3, 2026, that only the military justice system has jurisdiction to reverse a court-martial judgment, not civilian district courts. Bergdahl had pleaded guilty in 2017 to desertion and misbehavior before the enemy after walking off his base in Afghanistan in 2009, leading to a massive search that wounded U.S. troops and killed a military working dog. He was captured by the Taliban and later exchanged for five Guantanamo Bay detainees in a 2014 prisoner swap negotiated by President Barack Obama. The 2023 civilian ruling had argued the military judge failed to disclose a job application with the Justice Department, creating a potential conflict of interest. The appeals panel did not address claims of command influence or former President Donald Trump's comments calling for Bergdahl's execution. Bergdahl's attorney, Eugene R. Fidell, said the case raises integrity concerns about the military justice system and indicated options for further appeal within 45 days, including a possible Supreme Court review.
Source report
A federal appeals court on Tuesday reinstated Bowe Bergdahl's conviction, overturning a 2023 ruling that had vacated the court-martial of the former U.S. Army soldier. Bergdahl walked off his base in Afghanistan in 2009, triggering an intensive search that resulted in injuries to other troops.
Court Ruling
A three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit ruled that the federal court which overturned Bergdahl's military conviction lacked the jurisdiction to do so. The panel determined that only the military justice system has the authority to reverse Bergdahl's judgment.
"District courts lack jurisdiction on collateral review to vacate court-martial judgments," wrote Judge Robert Wilkins on behalf of the panel.
Background
- In 2009, Bergdahl, then 23, walked off his base during a deployment to Afghanistan and was captured by the Taliban.
- American soldiers were severely injured, and one military working dog, Remco, was killed during operations to find him.
- Bergdahl stated he left his post to reach another headquarters and report perceived issues with leadership. Instead, he was abducted, tortured, and held in brutal conditions.
- Then-President Barack Obama negotiated Bergdahl's release in a 2014 prisoner swap, exchanging him for five Taliban leaders held at Guantanamo Bay.
Court-Martial and Sentencing
During a 2017 military court-martial, Bergdahl pleaded guilty to desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. He was dishonorably discharged and ordered to forfeit $10,000 in pay. Although prosecutors sought 14 years' imprisonment, he was not sentenced to any time after presenting evidence of torture.
Political Controversy
The prisoner swap, case, and sentencing sparked significant political debate:
- Former Sen. John McCain and then-President Donald Trump called for Bergdahl to be harshly punished.
- Trump called for Bergdahl's execution during his 2016 campaign.
- Bergdahl's attorneys argued that Trump's comments could have influenced the military judge.
Previous Vacated Conviction
Approximately three years ago, a civilian judge vacated Bergdahl's conviction, arguing that the military judge in his initial court-martial did not disclose an application for an executive branch job as an immigration judge—a potential conflict of interest.
Unaddressed Issues
The D.C. panel did not rule on whether Trump's incendiary comments influenced the case or whether the initial military judge should have disclosed his application for a Justice Department job.
Attorney's Response
Eugene R. Fidell, Bergdahl's attorney, told Military Times that the case concerns "the integrity of the military justice system" and noted "a grave command influence problem that has pervaded this case from the very beginning." He expressed disappointment that the appeals court did not address that issue.
Fidell's team has 45 days to consider options for challenging the ruling, including asking the same panel to reconsider or seeking discretionary review by the Supreme Court.
Eve Sampson is a reporter and former Army officer. She has covered conflict worldwide, writing for The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Associated Press.
Source
Military TimesWestern
Part of this Story
Federal appeals court reinstates Bowe Bergdahl's desertion conviction, overturning 2023 ruling