US Deports Afghan Woman in First-Ever Use of Secretive Alien Terrorist Removal Court

The United States has deported a 47-year-old Afghan woman using a secretive federal tribunal that relies on classified evidence, marking the first time the government has successfully utilized the Alien Terrorist Removal Court since its creation in 1996.[1][2]

Nazira Haji Zada, a lawful permanent resident who lived in Fort Worth, Texas, was deported to Afghanistan on Friday after the Department of Justice accused her of helping conceal an ISIL-inspired plot. The alleged conspiracy involved a planned mass shooting in Oklahoma on Election Day in 2024.[2][4]

Crucially, federal prosecutors never charged Haji Zada with a crime. While her son, Abdullah Haji Zada, and son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, pleaded guilty to related terrorism charges, the government opted to pursue Haji Zada's removal through the specialized immigration court rather than the standard criminal justice system.[1][2]

Congress established the Alien Terrorist Removal Court in 1996, designing it to handle cases where disclosing intelligence in open court could compromise national security. The tribunal consists of five federal judges serving staggered five-year terms.[2][3]

Under the court's rules, the government can present classified evidence to the judges that the defendant is never allowed to see. The DOJ is only required to provide an unclassified summary that the court deems sufficient for the accused to prepare a defense—a standard that civil liberties advocates argue fundamentally undermines the right to a fair trial.[1][3]

Attorney General Todd Blanche initiated the removal proceedings on July 15, 2026, following Haji Zada's initial arrest in 2024. Rather than litigate the classified evidence, Haji Zada waived her right to challenge the detention and consented to the deportation order.[1][2][4]

The Justice Department celebrated the outcome as a historic milestone for federal law enforcement. "Those who support and condone terrorism should not be living in the United States," Blanche said, adding that the successful deportation demonstrates the department's willingness to deploy "every tool at its disposal" to protect the country.[2][3][4]

Defense attorneys immediately pushed back against the government's framing, emphasizing that Haji Zada's decision to accept removal "should not be seen as an endorsement of this court's legitimacy." They warned that the precedent threatens the legal protections afforded to non-citizens living legally in the United States.[1][2]

"Dragging lawful permanent residents into court but refusing to show them or their attorneys the evidence that will be used against them is a plain violation of due process," her defense team said in a statement. "We are confident that the Alien Terrorist Removal Court will be struck down as unconstitutional as soon as a judge is asked to address the issue."[1][2][3]

The resolution of the case leaves the constitutionality of the 1996 statute untested by an appellate court. The Justice Department has not indicated if it plans to activate the dormant tribunal for additional deportations, leaving the precedent standing as a new administrative pathway for terrorism-related removals.[2][4]