This judicial action involves an appeals court affirming executive authority over plea deals in a high-profile terrorism case. A-score: rule_of_law(3) reflects normal judicial review process without systemic damage; separation(3) shows standard checks between judicial and executive branches functioning as designed; civil_rights(1) minimal as this affects procedural rights of specific defendants in terrorism case. Severity multipliers near baseline as this is reversible through further appeals and sets limited precedent on executive authority in military commissions. Mechanism modifier 1.15 for judicial action. Final A=10.13. B-score: outrage_bait(6) and media_friendliness(7) high due to 9/11 emotional resonance; novelty(5) moderate as plea deal disputes are common but 9/11 context elevates; Layer 2 minimal as this is routine appellate process. Final B=14.33. With A<25, no clear constitutional mechanism damage, and narrow procedural scope affecting specific defendants in unique military commission context, this classifies as Noise - legally significant but not constitutionally damaging.