I don't understand what double jeopardy has got to do with it. I'm not a lawyer, but the conviction was for the drunk and offensive behaviour on a civil aircraft. I can't see that that would prevent a further civil prosecution in the States by the airline to recover their costs based on that conviction?
Or try him on other offenses. That's one way to get around having jeopardy attach. (See US v. Rezaq where the defendant participated in a hijack which ended up in Malta. People were killed. The defandant was prosecuted in Malta for murder, attempted murder, and hostage-taking, but the United States prosecution was for air piracy). However, it's easier than that... The US Constitution's Double Jeopardy Clause... "does not prohibit sequential trials by different sovereigns."*
Of course, "air piracy" is a stretch on this one, so the US government will need to find some offense that allows use of a long-arm statute. This assumes he'll be prosecuted at all in the US. One can only hope.
Dave
*
See United States v. Wheeler, 435 U.S. 313, 317, 98 S.Ct. 1079, 1082-83, 55 L.Ed.2d 303 (1978) (sequential prosecution in Indian tribal court and in federal court is not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause); United States v. Richardson, 580 F.2d 946, 947 (9th Cir.1978) (per curiam) (applying this holding to sequential prosecutions in Guatemalan and United States courts).