A federal appeals court restored Bowe Bergdahl’s military conviction Tuesday, reversing a 2023 civilian court decision that erased the judgment against the former Army soldier.

Bergdahl abandoned his post in Afghanistan in 2009, triggering a dangerous search that left American troops severely injured.

A three judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit concluded that the civilian federal court lacked authority to throw out Bergdahl’s court martial judgment.

The panel determined that any effort to reverse the conviction belonged within the military justice system.

Here's What They're Not Telling You About Your Retirement

“District courts lack jurisdiction on collateral review to vacate court-martial judgments,” Judge Robert Wilkins wrote on behalf of the panel.

That finding restored the conviction without resolving several other arguments Bergdahl’s attorneys have raised during the long running case.

Bergdahl was 23 years old when he walked away from his base while deployed to Afghanistan.

He claimed he intended to reach another headquarters and report what he viewed as leadership problems, but his departure instead placed fellow service members in danger and launched an enormous effort to locate him.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

Taliban fighters captured Bergdahl after he left the installation, and he remained in captivity for nearly five years.

He later described being tortured and held under brutal conditions, evidence his lawyers used while arguing against a lengthy prison sentence.

The cost of searching for Bergdahl extended far beyond manpower and resources.

American soldiers suffered severe injuries during the operations, while Remco, a military working dog participating in the search, was killed.

Then President Barack Obama secured Bergdahl’s release in 2014 through a controversial prisoner exchange.

The United States surrendered five members of the Taliban leadership who were being held at Guantanamo Bay in return for the captured soldier.

That swap ignited fierce political criticism because Washington gave up senior Taliban figures to recover a soldier who had deliberately left his post.

Critics argued that the arrangement rewarded the enemy while disregarding the troops injured during the effort to find Bergdahl.

Bergdahl pleaded guilty in 2017 to desertion and misbehavior before the enemy during his military court martial. He received a dishonorable discharge and was ordered to forfeit $10,000 in pay, although the military judge declined to impose prison time.

Military prosecutors had requested a 14 year prison sentence, but Bergdahl presented evidence detailing the torture he experienced in Taliban captivity.

The sentence produced another round of public anger from Americans who believed the punishment failed to reflect the danger his actions created for other troops.

President Donald Trump and the late Sen. John McCain were among the prominent voices demanding severe punishment.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump called for Bergdahl’s execution, prompting defense attorneys to argue that his remarks might have influenced the military judge overseeing the proceedings.

About three years ago, a civilian federal judge vacated Bergdahl’s conviction after identifying a potential conflict involving the military judge.

The judge who handled the original court martial had not disclosed that he applied for an executive branch position as an immigration judge.

The District of Columbia Circuit panel did not decide whether that undisclosed job application compromised the case.

It also did not address Bergdahl’s claim that Trump’s public criticism improperly influenced the military justice process.

Eugene R. Fidell, Bergdahl’s attorney, said in an interview with Military Times that the dispute concerns “the integrity of the military justice system.”

He added that “there is a grave command influence problem that has pervaded this case from the very beginning.”

Fidell said the legal team hoped the appeals court would confront the command influence allegations, but the judges instead resolved the case on jurisdictional grounds.

That narrower ruling leaves Bergdahl’s conviction intact while avoiding a broader judgment about the conduct of the original proceedings.

Bergdahl’s legal team has 45 days to consider its next move. Available options include requesting reconsideration from the same panel or asking the Supreme Court to conduct a discretionary review, but for now, the guilty judgment and dishonorable discharge once again stand.

Warning: Account balances and purchasing power no longer tell the same story. Know in 2 minutes if your retirement is working for you.