Washington, D.C. — For the first time since its creation nearly three decades ago, the Alien Terrorist Removal Court (ATRC) has held a hearing. The U.S. Department of Justice seeks to deport a lawful permanent resident accused of supporting the terrorist organization ISIS (Islamic State).
The rarely used court was established by Congress in 1996. It was designed to allow the federal government to pursue the removal of non-U.S. citizens accused of terrorist activity. Notably, the procedures permit the use of classified evidence under specific legal procedures.
The inaugural case involves Nazira Haji Zada, a 47-year-old permanent resident living in Fort Worth, Texas. Federal prosecutors allege Zada supported ISIS and helped radicalize members of her family.
Government Relies on Classified National Security Evidence
During the hearing, Justice Department attorneys stated that classified intelligence forms a significant part of the government’s case. Prosecutors allege that Zada worked alongside her son-in-law to encourage extremist ideology within her family.
Federal officials previously prosecuted Zada’s son and son-in-law on terrorism-related charges connected to an alleged plot targeting the 2024 U.S. elections on behalf of ISIS. Both men were convicted. As a result, they are expected to be deported after completing their prison sentences.
Unlike criminal prosecutions, proceedings before the Alien Terrorist Removal Court are civil immigration actions. As a result, the government is not required to meet the criminal standard of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, the court focuses on whether sufficient legal grounds exist to remove an individual from the United States.
Defense Challenges Constitutionality of the Proceedings
Attorneys representing Zada argued that the special court raises serious constitutional concerns. This is particularly regarding due process protections and the use of classified evidence that may not be fully accessible to the defense.
They contend that the procedures provide insufficient safeguards for individuals facing deportation. In addition, they indicated they intend to challenge the legality of the court throughout the case.
Presiding over the proceedings is Senior U.S. District Judge Joan Ericksen. She acknowledged that the long-dormant court is still establishing many of its administrative procedures. These include electronic filing systems and public access to court records.
Rare Court Faces Renewed Attention
The activation of the Alien Terrorist Removal Court marks a significant development in U.S. national security and immigration law. Although Congress authorized the tribunal nearly 30 years ago, it had never conducted a hearing until now.
Justice Department officials say the court provides an important legal mechanism for handling sensitive national security cases involving classified intelligence. Additionally, it allows for pursuing the removal of non-citizens accused of supporting terrorist organizations.
Legal experts expect the case to receive close scrutiny as constitutional questions surrounding due process, classified evidence, and executive authority are likely to shape future use of the court. The outcome could establish important legal precedents for how terrorism-related immigration cases are handled in the years ahead.
