US prosecutors are appealing to the Alien Terrorist Removal Court for the removal of Nazira Haji Zada, though she faces no criminal charges.
Published On 30 Jul 2026
The administration of President Donald Trump has convened, for the first time, a court created to facilitate the removal of alleged “terrorists” from the United States.
Critics say that Thursday’s hearing of the Alien Terrorist Removal Court is yet another way the Trump administration is seeking to circumvent due process protections.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
The Alien Terrorist Removal Court was first created in 1996 but has never been used in the three decades since, and its legality is hotly debated.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, however, argued that the court was necessary to adjudicate the case of an Afghan woman who lives in the US as a permanent legal resident.
“Congress created the Alien Terrorist Removal Court three decades ago to remove from the United States alien terrorists who never should have been here in the first place,” Blanche said in a statement.
The Trump administration has accused Nazira Haji Zada, a 47-year-old resident of Fort Worth, Texas, of participating in an alleged shooting plot, set to be carried out on election day in 2024.
The plot involved her sons, Tawhedi and Abdullah Haji Zada, who were arrested in October 2024, before any suspected violence could occur. Both men pleaded guilty. Abdullah is serving 15 years in prison, and Tawhedi is awaiting sentencing.
The FBI says it scuttled the plot when the two men attempted to buy two rifles and 500 rounds of ammunition from an undercover agent.
No criminal charges, however, have been levied against their mother, Nazira.
While the Justice Department claims there is “a preponderance of the evidence” against Nazira, government lawyers told the Alien Terrorist Removal Court that its case included classified information that could not be released to the public.
“The underlying information is classified because disclosure would enable terrorists and terrorist organizations to avoid preventative or detection measures or would reveal FBI or other U.S. Intelligence Community sources,” the FBI wrote in a July 15 memo.
Courts, however, generally have procedures for handling classified information, and a judge on the Alien Terrorist Removal Court expressed scepticism about the government’s argument.
The Justice Department’s case includes the allegation that Nazira stoked her son’s sympathies for ISIL (ISIS), an armed group that the US considers a “foreign terrorist organisation”.
It also claims she planned to leave the US on a one-way ticket to Kabul, Afghanistan, ahead of her sons’ planned attack in 2024.
Nazira’s lawyer, public defender Matthew Farley, has accused the Trump administration of seeking to advance its mass deportation push by sidestepping normal legal protections for foreign nationals.
“This entire scheme is in violation of due process and unconstitutional,” said Farley, calling the hearing “a runaround for bringing a criminal case”.
Five judges from around the US serve on the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, appointed by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.
At Thursday’s hearing, Judge Joan Ericksen declined Farley’s request to dismiss the case immediately.
But the court acknowledged that it was still establishing its “infrastructure”, and Eriksen clarified that Nazira was not facing criminal proceedings.
“This is not a criminal matter,” the judge told her. “This is a civil matter that arises under the immigration code.”