The Justice Department has deported an Afghan woman who backed an ISIS-inspired Election Day 2024 mass shooting plot, the first completed case in the 30-year history of the U.S. Alien Terrorist Removal Court.
The Justice Department has deported an Afghan woman who admitted to backing an ISIS-inspired mass shooting planned for Election Day 2024, marking the first time in three decades that the federal government has successfully used a specialized court built to remove alien terrorists. Nazira Haji Zada, 47, a lawful permanent resident who had been living in Fort Worth, Texas, was sent back to Afghanistan after conceding to the U.S. Alien Terrorist Removal Court (ATRC) that she was an alien terrorist and waiving her right to appeal.
The case is a landmark. Congress created the ATRC in 1996 to handle a narrow class of non-citizens accused of terrorism, but the court had never been used to complete a removal until now. Attorney General Todd Blanche called the outcome a decisive win, and FBI Director Kash Patel described it as a historic step in protecting the homeland.
The ATRC was designed as a sealed, specialized venue for cases involving classified evidence that cannot be safely aired in open immigration proceedings. For 30 years it went unused, a dormant tool that critics on both sides of the aisle had all but written off.
Zada's removal is the first completed case to move through it. The court issued an order of removal for her on August 20, clearing the way for her deportation to her country of origin.
"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 in a statement. "Those who support and condone terrorism should not be living in the United States, and this first-ever case before the ATRC shows how the Department of Justice will use every tool at its disposal to protect our country."
Zada was the matriarch of a family that federal investigators say plotted an ISIS-inspired mass shooting on American soil tied to the 2024 election. Her son, Abdullah Haji Zada, and her son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, were arrested in October 2024 after allegedly buying guns and ammunition from an undercover FBI agent.
The men later admitted to purchasing AK-47 rifles to carry out a mass shooting on behalf of the Islamic State. Zada's son was sentenced to 15 years in prison. Tawhedi is awaiting sentencing.
According to the government's account, the family began selling off its possessions to raise money for the attack. They bought one-way tickets to Kabul, the Afghan capital, with the exception of the two men who were to carry out the violence.
Zada's role, prosecutors said, was that of a supporter and facilitator within the household as the plan took shape. She is now permanently barred from returning to the United States.
FBI Director Kash Patel framed the deportation as a warning to anyone who would use America's freedoms against it.
"An individual who supported a plot by ISIS-sympathizing family members to commit an attack in America has paid the price for that," Patel said. "She came to our country, betrayed it, and has now lost the right to live here and enjoy our democratic freedoms. This FBI and our Justice Department partners will protect the American people from the threat of terrorism, using all means necessary."
The case fits a broader pattern of aggressive counterterror enforcement in recent months. Federal officials have repeatedly highlighted removals of known or suspected terrorists, and the Zada matter shows the government is willing to reach for legal instruments that had long gone unused.
Zada's defense attorneys made clear they do not view her decision to consent to removal as a concession about the court itself. In a statement, her lawyers argued that the ATRC's procedures deny lawful permanent residents basic due process, because defendants and their counsel are not shown the evidence used against them.
"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," the defense team said. They added that they are confident the Alien Terrorist Removal Court will be struck down as unconstitutional as soon as a judge is asked to address the issue directly.
That challenge is the next front. Because Zada waived her appeal, her own case will not be the vehicle for testing the court's constitutionality, leaving that fight to future defendants. Legal observers expect the government to lean on the ATRC more often now that it has been shown to work from start to finish.
The Zada deportation marks the first completed use of a court that Congress intended to deploy against terrorism but that sat idle for a generation. How aggressively the administration now uses the ATRC, and whether federal courts uphold its unusual secrecy rules, will shape immigration and national security law for years to come.
For now, the administration is treating the case as proof that long-dormant tools can still be sharpened and used. Supporters say that is exactly the point: a system built to keep terrorists out of the country, finally working as designed. The next test comes when a future defendant refuses to waive appeal and forces a judge to rule on the court's very legitimacy.
The Justice Department has deported an Afghan woman who backed an ISIS-inspired Election Day 2024 mass shooting plot, the first completed case in the 30-year history of the U.S. Alien Terrorist Removal Court.
freedomlinedispatch.com
