An Afghan woman accused of supporting the ISIL (ISIS) armed group has been deported from the United States, marking the first instance the government has utilized the obscure Alien Terrorist Removal Court. Nazira Haji Zada, 47, was deported to Afghanistan after being brought before the specialized court, the US Department of Justice announced on Friday.

The Alien Terrorist Removal Court, established by Congress in 1996 as part of a broader anti-terrorism effort, had remained dormant until Haji Zada's case. The court is comprised of five judges serving staggered five-year terms and allows the US government to present classified information that could jeopardize national security, while providing an unclassified summary for the accused to build a defense.

Haji Zada, a lawful permanent resident who had been living in Fort Worth, Texas, was arrested in 2024. US Attorney General Todd Blanche initiated removal proceedings on July 15 of this year. She ultimately waived her rights to contest her detention and was subsequently deported. The Department of Justice alleged that Haji Zada aided in concealing a plot for a mass shooting in Oklahoma, inspired by ISIL, on election day in 2024.

While Haji Zada herself was never formally charged with a crime, her son, Abdullah Haji Zada, and son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, pleaded guilty to related offenses. The case highlights the government's use of specialized legal tools to address national security concerns, even in the absence of criminal charges against an individual.

Officials within the Department of Justice hailed the deportation as a significant victory for national security. Attorney General Todd Blanche stated that individuals who support or condone terrorism should not reside in the United States, emphasizing the department's commitment to employing all available resources to safeguard the nation.

Haji Zada's defense attorneys, however, argued that the use of the court, which allows for the presentation of evidence withheld from the accused, violates due process rights for lawful permanent residents. They expressed confidence that the Alien Terrorist Removal Court would eventually be declared unconstitutional.

The defense lawyers stated that Haji Zada's decision to consent to removal should not be interpreted as an acceptance of the court's legitimacy. They contended that bringing individuals before a court while refusing to disclose the evidence against them is a clear breach of due process principles.

It remains unclear whether the Department of Justice intends to pursue further cases utilizing the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, given the legal challenges raised by the defense.