The Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a court created 30 years ago to deport immigrants accused of terrorism, is weighing its first-ever case: a bid by the Justice Department to deport an Afghan woman it has accused of supporting the Islamic State group, often known as ISIS. 

In a hearing Thursday morning, the government argued to remove Nazira Haji Zada, an Afghan permanent resident living in Texas who prosecutors allege helped plot an ISIS-inspired attack. Because much of the evidence in support of these allegations remains classified, the case has been brought before the ATRC, which was created by Congress in 1996 to preside over deportation proceedings that largely rely on classified information. 

Prosecutors allege Zada played a role in plotting to commit a mass shooting on Election Day in 2024 on behalf of the Islamic State group. Zada’s son and son-in-law have already pleaded guilty to charges related to the foiled attack. Abdullah Haji Zada and Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi admitted to buying two assault-style rifles and 500 rounds of ammunition to execute the attack. Both men were sentenced to prison and will be deported after they complete their sentences. 

Nazira Haji Zada has not publicly been charged with a crime, and many of the details related to her case remain classified. But an unclassified summary of her case compiled by the FBI alleges that she “formally pledged loyalty to ISIS,” “worked to indoctrinate her children with ISIS ideology” and planned to relocate her family to ISIS-controlled territory.

Inside court Thursday morning, Zada was solemn and silent, only nodding yes or no as the judge asked her if she understood her rights. 

Presiding over the hearing is the court’s chief judge, U.S. District Judge Joan N. Ericksen, who sits full-time on the federal bench in Minnesota. In her remarks, she highlighted the unprecedented nature of the hearing.

“We are in the early stages in implementing infrastructure,” she said, “so there may be moments of inelegance.” 

The federal public defenders appointed to represent Zada argued the case itself was a violation of her due process rights, pointing to the short unclassified case summary the government is using to publicly justify her removal. 

“The fact that a lawful permanent resident could be removed based on two paragraphs is a violation of due process,” Matthew Farley, an attorney for Zada, told the judge. 

Lawyers for Zada declined to comment on the case to MS NOW. 

“The allegations in this case show the matriarch of an ISIS-sympathizing family aiding in a plot to launch a mass casualty attack on American voters on Election Day,” acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement ahead of the hearing Thursday. “The Department’s application in this court makes clear that terrorists have no place in the United States of America.”

Under federal statute, an “alien terrorist” is a noncitizen whose presence in the county would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences. The ATRC’s framework allows the government to present classified information in cases where disclosing that information publicly would present a grave national security risk. 

The court was activated earlier this month when the government filed its first-ever petition, approved by Blanche, under seal. The court held a closed-door hearing on July 16. The case was unsealed, revealing the name of the subject, on Wednesday.  

Throughout the hourlong hearing, Ericksen reiterated her commitment to carefulness, fairness and the rule of law in the unprecedented case. A hearing on Zada’s detention will be scheduled for next week, as the judge begins the process of considering her fate in what will be the first ruling of its kind.

The post Defendant in Alien Terrorist Removal case challenges secrecy as due process violation appeared first on MS NOW.

Author: Source Author

From MS Now.