A federal jury in Buffalo, New York, convicted Hadi Matar on July 29, 2026, on terrorism charges tied to his 2022 stabbing of author Salman Rushdie. The jury deliberated for roughly two hours before finding Matar — a 28-year-old U.S. citizen from Fairview, New Jersey — guilty on all counts. He now faces a potential life sentence (Al Jazeera).

The U.S. Department of Justice announced the verdict through its Office of Public Affairs, confirming the conviction on charges related to the attempted murder of Salman Rushdie (DOJ OPA). The case was prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of New York, which published the announcement on its news page. The DOJ's National Security Division also featured the conviction in its press room.

A grand jury — a panel of citizens that decides whether enough evidence exists to bring federal charges — initially returned a three-count indictment against Matar on July 24, 2024, when he was 26 years old (DOJ USAO-WDNY). The federal charges included attempting to provide material support to Hezbollah in Lebanon, engaging in terrorism transcending national boundaries, and providing material support to terrorists. "Material support" can mean money, training, equipment, or other resources given to a designated terrorist organization — even if the support is indirect or attempted rather than completed (Al Jazeera).

The federal trial opened on July 22, 2026. During the proceedings, Salman Rushdie testified about the attack for the second time (AP News). Matar had pleaded not guilty to the federal terrorism charges. He declined to testify and chose not to call any witnesses in his defense (AP News).

The original attack occurred on stage at a western New York amphitheater in 2022, during an event hosted by a New York arts institute. Rushdie was partially blinded as a result of the stabbing. Henry Reese, who was stabbed alongside Rushdie, was the co-founder of the organization hosting the event (Reuters).

Prior to the federal conviction, Matar was found guilty of attempted murder in the second degree in New York state court in 2025. He was also convicted of assault in the second degree for stabbing Henry Reese (Reuters). At the time of the federal conviction, Matar was already serving a 25-year prison sentence for the state attempted murder charge.

Prosecutors argued at the federal trial that Matar was inspired by Ayatollah Khomeini's 1989 fatwa — a religious edict issued by Iran's then-supreme leader calling for Salman Rushdie's death. Evidence presented at trial showed Matar discussed the fatwa on messaging apps in 2021 and 2022. Iran has denied any involvement in the attack on Rushdie (Al Jazeera).

Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Eisenberg issued a statement after the verdict saying "justice has been done" and calling the attack "a chilling reminder of the global reach of Iranian terrorism" (Al Jazeera).

The broader context here involves the U.S. government's legal strategy of layering federal terrorism charges on top of state-level attempted murder convictions. Think of it as two separate legal tracks running in parallel: the state prosecuted Matar for the violent act itself — the stabbing — while the federal government pursued charges that frame the same event as part of a transnational network. By charging Matar with attempting to provide material support to Hezbollah and engaging in terrorism transcending national boundaries, federal prosecutors positioned the attack not solely as a localized act of violence but as an event connected to broader international networks. The prosecution's use of Matar's messaging app discussions about the 1989 fatwa served as a bridge between his stated ideological motivations and the federal terrorism statutes.

Eisenberg's statement explicitly linking the verdict to "the global reach of Iranian terrorism" raises the case's diplomatic dimensions. This framing aligns the DOJ's rhetoric with the long-standing U.S. posture toward Iran's alleged use of proxy organizations — groups like Hezbollah that receive support from Tehran even as Iran denies directing their specific actions. The case sets a notable precedent for how domestic courts address ideologically motivated violence tied to foreign designations. Matar, already serving a 25-year state sentence, now confronts the possibility of consecutive federal sentencing — meaning the federal sentence could be stacked on top of, rather than run alongside, his state term. That raises the operational stakes of the dual-track prosecution, and it signals a template the Justice Department may seek to apply in future cases where lone-actor violence intersects with international extremist networks.