- Justice Department used the Alien Terrorist Removal Court for the first time against Afghan resident Nazira Haji Zada.
- A judge signed the order on August twentieth, twenty twenty-six, and she was removed five days later.
- The court permanently ended her residency and barred her from returning to the United States.
The Justice Department used the Alien Terrorist Removal Court for the first time to remove Nazira Haji Zada, a 47-year-old Afghan lawful permanent resident who had been living in Fort Worth, Texas. Officials removed her from the United States on August 25, 2026, and she arrived in Afghanistan the next day.
The case ended with an agreed order. Haji Zada conceded in a motion that she qualified as an “alien terrorist” and waived her right to appeal.
Free toolCSPA Age-Out Calculator Online
The government filed its application on July 15, 2026. Haji Zada appeared in open court in Washington, D.C., on July 30.
Senior U.S. District Judge Joan N. Ericksen signed the order on August 20, 2026. The proceeding concluded five days before her removal.
The court ended her U.S. residency and barred her return
The order terminated Haji Zada’s lawful permanent resident status and permanently barred her from admission to the United States. It therefore resolved both her immigration status and her ability to seek admission again.
The case involved a national-security removal process rather than a criminal prosecution. The court’s first known use came nearly three decades after Congress created it.
The special court handles national-security removal cases involving classified information
Congress created the court in 1996 for removal cases involving alleged terrorists. The governing statute defines an “alien terrorist” by reference to 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(4)(B).
The Attorney General may seek removal through the court when classified information is involved. The process allows the government to present national-security evidence without disclosing sensitive material through an ordinary public proceeding.
| Legal feature | Standard described in the material |
|---|---|
| Required judicial finding | Probable cause that the person is correctly identified as an alien terrorist in the United States and that removal would pose a risk to national security |
| Evidentiary standard | “Preponderance of evidence” |
| Court history | First known case in its 30-year history |
The statute requires the judge to grant the application when those conditions are met. The evidentiary threshold is lower than the standard used in a criminal prosecution.
The case’s use of the court also put a permanent resident inside a mechanism generally associated with alleged terrorist removal cases. That feature, along with the use of classified evidence, made the proceeding distinct from a routine immigration case.
The first case has drawn a due-process objection
A statement criticized the government’s handling of evidence, arguing that bringing permanent residents into court while withholding the material from them and their attorneys violates due process.
The objection focused on the closed nature of the national-security process. The proceeding was designed to avoid disclosing sensitive information, while the government relied on evidence connected to its allegation.
The department’s use of the court signals that officials intend to rely on the mechanism again. The law had remained unused until this case, which concluded with Haji Zada’s arrival in Afghanistan on August 26, 2026.
This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified immigration attorney about your specific case.
