DOJ USES ALIEN TERRORIST REMOVAL COURT FOR FIRST TIME TO REMOVE AFGHAN NATIONAL WHO SUPPORTED ISIS-INSPIRED ELECTION DAY PLOT

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department has used the United States Alien Terrorist Removal Court for the first time in the court’s three-decade history, securing the removal of an Afghan national who conceded that she qualified as an alien terrorist after supporting members of her family involved in an ISIS-inspired mass-casualty plot targeting Election Day in 2024.

Nazira Haji Zada, 47, an Afghan national who had been living in Fort Worth, Texas, was removed from the United States after proceedings before the specialized federal court known as the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, or ATRC.

The court issued its removal order on August 20, 2026. The order remained under seal until September 11, after Zada had been returned to her country of origin. The Justice Department said she is now permanently inadmissible to the United States.

The proceeding marked the first use of the ATRC since Congress created it in 1996.

The Justice Department filed its application seeking Zada’s removal on July 15 after Attorney General Todd Blanche certified the case. Zada first appeared in open court on July 30 before ATRC Chief Judge Joan N. Ericksen, who later signed the final removal order.

Federal authorities used classified information during the proceeding to establish the government’s case that Zada qualified as an alien terrorist under the governing statute.

The Justice Department also provided Zada and her attorneys, two federal public defenders, with approximately half a terabyte of documents supporting the removal case.

With counsel, Zada ultimately conceded that she met the statutory definition and waived her right to appeal the removal order.

The case was connected directly to the previously prosecuted Election Day terrorism plot involving Zada’s son, Abdullah Haji Zada, and her son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi.

Both men were arrested on October 7, 2024, after purchasing firearms and ammunition from an undercover FBI employee for what federal prosecutors described as a planned ISIS-inspired attack intended to occur on or around Election Day, November 5, 2024.

According to federal court records cited by the Justice Department, Tawhedi admitted that between June and October 2024 he conspired with at least one other person to acquire two AK-47 rifles, 500 rounds of ammunition and 10 magazines for a mass-casualty attack carried out on behalf of ISIS.

Investigators said Tawhedi also communicated with an ISIS facilitator about the planned weapons purchase and asked whether 500 rounds of ammunition would be sufficient for the attack.

Abdullah Haji Zada was 17 at the time of his arrest but entered his guilty plea as an adult.

He was later sentenced to 15 years in federal prison and agreed as part of his plea agreement to a judicial removal order requiring his deportation to Afghanistan after completing his sentence.

He also acknowledged that the removal order would terminate his lawful permanent resident status and waived most avenues for appealing his removal.

Tawhedi, 28, pleaded guilty on June 13, 2025, to two terrorism-related offenses: conspiring and attempting to provide material support and resources to ISIS, and receiving, attempting to receive and conspiring to receive firearms and ammunition in furtherance of a federal crime of terrorism.

At the time of the September 11 announcement, Tawhedi was still awaiting sentencing.

Federal authorities said Zada’s role went beyond passive association with the defendants.

According to the Justice Department, the family began selling property in 2024 as preparations for the planned attack progressed.

Items sold included furniture, computers, a mobile phone and both family vehicles.

Zada also signed a contract to sell the family home.

The family subsequently purchased one-way airfare to Kabul, Afghanistan, for several members of the household shortly before Election Day.

Those tickets included Zada and minor children but did not include Abdullah or Tawhedi, the two men prosecutors said intended to remain in the United States to carry out the attack.

The Department of Justice characterized Zada as having supported her family members’ plans and said the government relied on classified information and extensive documentary evidence during the ATRC proceeding.

Attorney General Todd Blanche called the proceeding a major national-security case and said the department intended to use all lawful authorities available against individuals who support terrorism.

FBI Director Kash Patel said the case demonstrated the government’s ability to pursue terrorism-related threats through both criminal prosecutions and immigration-related national-security proceedings.

The ATRC occupies an unusual place in the federal legal system.

Congress established the court in 1996 specifically to hear removal cases involving non-U.S. citizens accused of terrorism-related conduct.

Its authority is found principally in 8 U.S.C. §§ 1531 through 1537.

The court is staffed by sitting Article III federal district judges who are separately appointed to the ATRC by the Chief Justice of the United States.

Unlike ordinary immigration proceedings, the ATRC was designed to address cases in which the government may need to rely on classified national-security information that cannot safely be disclosed publicly.

Under the statute, the government may use classified evidence when public disclosure would create national-security risks.

The law also provides for appointed counsel when necessary and permits either side to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The government must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the individual qualifies as an alien terrorist before the court may issue a removal order.

That standard is lower than the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt burden required in a criminal prosecution because ATRC proceedings concern removal rather than criminal guilt.

In Zada’s case, the proceeding ended without an appellate fight because she conceded the government’s position and waived appeal.

The Justice Department said the removal involved coordination among several federal agencies.

Participants included the Justice Department’s National Security Division, FBI and U.S. Marshals Service, along with the Department of Homeland Security’s Homeland Security Investigations and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Hayden O’Byrne of the National Security Division led the litigation with assistance from Deputy Chief Larry Schneider and Trial Attorneys Anna Donnell, Garrett Coyle and Evan Schultz.

The case is notable not simply because of Zada’s removal but because the federal government activated a court Congress created 30 years earlier and had never previously used.

That gives the proceeding significance beyond a single terrorism case.

The ATRC provides the government with a specialized national-security mechanism for cases in which immigration status, terrorism allegations and classified evidence intersect, while still placing the proceeding before Article III judges and preserving access to counsel and appellate review.

Zada’s removal establishes the first completed case under that system.

Her son remains in federal custody under a 15-year terrorism-related sentence, her son-in-law awaits sentencing after pleading guilty to federal terrorism offenses, and Zada herself has now been removed and permanently barred from returning to the United States.

---

Alien Terrorist Removal Court of the United States — In the Matter of Nazira Haji Zada, Order of Judicial Removal, Case No. 2026-TRC-1 (JNE), filed August 20, 2026. (Free Download)

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

🔥 NOW AVAILABLE! 🔥

‎👉 Eclipsera – Apple Music

---

---

---

---

---