First use of ATRC leads to deportation

What's happened

The Department of Justice has secured the first-ever removal under the Alien Terrorist Removal Court after Nazira Haji Zada, a lawful permanent resident in Fort Worth, Texas, has waived appeals and accepted designation as an "alien terrorist." The DOJ says classified evidence supported her removal after her son and son-in-law were convicted in a 2024 election-day attack plot.

What's behind the headline?

What happened

The Justice Department has used the long-dormant Alien Terrorist Removal Court to remove Nazira Haji Zada after she conceded she is an "alien terrorist" and waived appeal. Judges accepted an unclassified summary and classified submissions the government says established the designation.

Why this matters

• The ATRC lets the government keep critical evidence secret while pursuing deportation, so the administration will rely on it to remove non‑citizens the DOJ links to terrorism without exposing intelligence sources.
• Defence lawyers are arguing that withholding evidence from defendants and their counsel violates due process; that legal challenge is likely to move quickly into broader constitutional litigation.

Who benefits

• The Justice Department gains a cleared legal route to deport people tied to terrorism while protecting classified sources and methods.
• The government will argue this tool strengthens national security; civil liberties groups and defence lawyers will argue it erodes procedural rights and targets lawful permanent residents.

What will happen next

• Courts will test the ATRC's constitutionality; judges will determine whether using classified evidence in this way meets due process standards.
• The DOJ will likely consider additional ATRC filings in cases where it deems disclosure harmful to intelligence operations, increasing removal actions that the public cannot fully scrutinise.

Forecast

The use of the ATRC will increase removal orders the public cannot fully evaluate. That will force Congress and federal courts to clarify the balance between protecting intelligence and protecting procedural rights, and it will cause a wave of constitutional challenges that could define the court's future.

How we got here

Congress created the ATRC in 1996 to let the government use classified evidence in deportation proceedings when public disclosure would harm national security. The court had not heard a petition until the DOJ filed the first application in July 2026 in the Haji Zada case.

Our analysis

The Department of Justice framed the outcome as a national security victory. Attorney General Todd Blanche told reporters that the case "is a win for national security and the rule of law," and the DOJ has said classified information established that Haji Zada is an "alien terrorist" (BBC Business; Al Jazeera; Axios). Axios highlighted the court's novelty and explained that the government filed the first application in July and relied on an unclassified summary alongside classified material. The BBC and AP emphasised defence lawyers' due process objections: court-appointed lawyers Matthew Farley and Mary Manning Petras said their client was denied access to the evidence and warned that the ATRC "will be struck down as unconstitutional". The Independent and The New Arab provided more detail on the underlying criminal convictions, noting that Haji Zada's son and son-in-law pleaded guilty to plotting a 2024 election‑day mass shooting; The New Arab also noted the DOJ announced the removal on the anniversary period of 9/11. Taken together, government accounts focus on the national security rationale and legal firsts, while defence statements focus on procedural fairness and imminent constitutional challenges. Readers interested in the court filings can read Axios for the filing timeline and the BBC and AP for quotes from defence lawyers and DOJ statements.

Go deeper

• What legal arguments will defence teams use to challenge the ATRC's constitutionality?
• Will the DOJ file more cases through the Alien Terrorist Removal Court now that it has been used once?
• How will courts balance classified national security evidence with due process for lawful permanent residents?

More on these topics

• United States - Country in North America

  The United States of America, commonly known as the United States or America, is a country mostly located in central North America, between Canada and Mexico.

• Texas - US State

  Texas is a state in the South Central Region of the United States. It is the second largest U.S. state by both area and population.

• Islamic State - Form of government

  An Islamic state is a state that has a form of government based on Islamic law. As a term, it has been used to describe various historical polities and theories of governance in the Islamic world.

• Oklahoma - US State

  Oklahoma is a state in the South Central region of the United States, bordered by the state of Texas on the south and west, Kansas on the north, Missouri on the northeast, Arkansas on the east, New Mexico on the west, and Colorado on the northwest.

• Fort Worth - City in Texas

  Fort Worth is the fifth-largest city in the U.S. state of Texas and the 13th-largest city in the United States. It is the county seat of Tarrant County, covering nearly 350 square miles into three other counties: Denton, Parker, and Wise.

• Afghanistan - Country in South Asia

  Afghanistan, officially the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, is a landlocked country at the crossroads of Central and South Asia.