Justice Department Utilizes Rare Court to Deport Alleged Terrorist
In an unprecedented move, the U.S. Department of Justice has activated a long-dormant special court to facilitate the deportation of a legal resident accused of terrorist activities. This marks the first instance of such a case being brought before the court, which was established decades ago but remained unused until now.
The case involves Nazira Haji Zada, a 47-year-old originally from Afghanistan, who has been accused by prosecutors of aiding her son and son-in-law in planning an ISIS-inspired attack on the 2024 Election Day. Both men have been charged and are set to be deported after serving their prison sentences. Haji Zada’s son, Abdullah Haji Zada, received a 15-year sentence.
Following her arrest in Fort Worth, Texas, in July, Haji Zada appeared for an initial hearing. Unlike typical criminal proceedings, the Justice Department opted to pursue civil action through the Alien Terrorist Removal Court. This court allows for a lower burden of proof in deportation cases, particularly when classified evidence is involved, which is deemed sensitive to national security.
Established in 1996, the court’s purpose is to facilitate the deportation of individuals when using classified evidence. In this case, Haji Zada waived her right to contest her detention and agreed to her deportation. Senior U.S. District Judge Joan Ericksen ordered her removal, and the documents were publicly released shortly afterward.
Her legal representatives, Matthew Farley and Mary Manning Petras, have raised constitutional concerns, arguing that they were denied access to the evidence against their client. They maintain that the classified nature of the evidence violates due process rights.
In a statement, Haji Zada’s lawyers emphasized that her consent to deportation should not be interpreted as validating the court’s authority, stating, “Dragging lawful permanent residents into court but refusing to show them or their attorneys the evidence that will be used against them is a plain violation of due process.”
Having moved to the United States as a lawful permanent resident in 2018, Haji Zada’s family ties include her husband’s employment at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan until 2016. Authorities allege she played a central role in radicalizing her family to support ISIS and orchestrating their plans to move to ISIS-controlled territories.
According to prosecutors, the family sold possessions to fund the planned attack, with Haji Zada allegedly planning to relocate with other family members while her son and son-in-law stayed behind to execute the attack. Her son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, admitted his involvement in a plot to acquire firearms and ammunition for the attack.
Attorney General Todd Blanche, who approved the application to the court, expressed support for the court’s use, stating it exemplifies the Department’s commitment to national security. “This landmark case, resulting in the prompt removal of this alien terrorist to her country of origin, is a win for national security and the rule of law,” Blanche said.
This article was originally written by www.npr.org
Comments are closed.