Alien Terrorist Removal Court, Used for First Time, Cancels Release Hearing for Fort Worth Resident

A specialized federal court created in 1996 to deport suspected noncitizen terrorists using classified evidence has now been activated for the first time — and on Monday its chief judge canceled a hearing on whether the woman at the center of the case should remain in custody.

Chief Judge Joan N. Ericksen of the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, or ATRC, scrapped an Aug. 11 release hearing for Nazira Haji Zada and instead set deadlines for additional filings, according to the court’s Aug. 10 order. Zada, 47, a lawful permanent resident from Fort Worth, Texas, has been held in federal custody since her July 28 arrest by FBI agents and has not been publicly charged with a crime.

The case marks the first known use of the ATRC since Congress created it three decades ago under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. The court was designed for rare deportation cases in which the government says it must rely on classified national security evidence. Unlike a criminal prosecution, the proceeding is civil, and the judge can review secret material privately, outside the respondent’s presence and outside public view. If the government prevails, it seeks removal based on a preponderance of the evidence, a lower standard than in criminal court.

The Justice Department said it filed its application in the court on July 15, 2026. The docket lists the matter as 2026-TRC-1. A judge granted the application on July 27, court records show. Zada was arrested the next day at her home in Fort Worth and transported to Washington, where she has remained detained. The ATRC held an initial hearing on July 30. On Aug. 7, Zada’s lawyers moved to compel disclosure of classified material to cleared defense counsel. Ericksen’s Aug. 10 order then canceled the planned release hearing and set a revised briefing schedule.

The government’s allegations are laid out publicly only in summary form. In an unclassified filing, the government said the FBI “developed information” that Zada supports the Islamic State and helped a family terrorism conspiracy. “The FBI has developed information that NAZIRA is a supporter of ISIS, has formally pledged loyalty to ISIS, and supported TAWHEDI and ABDULLAH’S conspiracy,” the filing states.

The Justice Department has linked Zada to the 2024 Election Day plot involving her son, Abdullah Haji Zada, and son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi. DOJ said both men were arrested on Oct. 7, 2024. Abdullah was later sentenced to 15 years in prison, and Tawhedi pleaded guilty on June 13, 2025, and is awaiting sentencing.

Announcing the ATRC case on July 30, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said, “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.”

Zada’s lawyers have pushed back sharply, arguing that the court’s secrecy rules deny her a meaningful chance to contest the allegations. In their Aug. 7 motion, they said the government is detaining her without letting even attorneys with security clearances review the underlying evidence. “The government now ignores all of Ms. Haji Zada’s rights by detaining her based on evidence that it will not permit even her cleared counsel to review. This is a plain violation of due process …,” the motion says.

That challenge goes to the heart of why the case matters beyond one defendant. In ordinary criminal court, a defendant is generally entitled to see and confront the evidence against them. In this court, the statute allows classified information to be submitted ex parte and in camera — meaning only the judge may review it. Court records indicate the government has provided an unclassified summary, while the underlying material remains secret.

Zada could face removal if the government succeeds, though the proceeding does not itself establish a criminal offense. Any appeal from the ATRC would go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. If she were ultimately ordered removed to Afghanistan, that could raise additional concerns: U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk cautioned in May against involuntary returns to Afghanistan without individualized risk assessments, citing risks including arbitrary arrest, detention, torture and other ill-treatment.

For now, the immediate fight is procedural. With the release hearing off the calendar, the first case ever brought in the Alien Terrorist Removal Court will continue under the judge’s new filing schedule.