The Justice Department has activated a dormant 30-year-old federal court for the first time ever, seeking to deport a 47-year-old Afghan national it calls the matriarch of an ISIS-sympathizing family that plotted a mass shooting on Election Day 2024.
Nazira Haji Zada stood before Chief Judge Joan N. Ericksen in Washington, D.C., on Thursday after the Department of Justice filed its inaugural case in the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a specialized bench Congress created in 1996 but never used until now. The judge denied a defense motion to dismiss the case, and the proceeding moved forward. Haji Zada was arrested in late July at her home in Fort Worth, Texas, the Daily Caller reported.
The government alleges she played a direct role in a scheme to carry out an ISIS-inspired mass-casualty attack on American voters. Her son and son-in-law have already been convicted for their parts in the same plot, and the details in the DOJ's own press release paint a picture of a family that liquidated its possessions, bought assault rifles, and booked one-way flights out of the country in preparation.
The plot centered on Haji Zada's 28-year-old son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, and her son Abdullah Haji Zada, who was 17 at the time of his arrest. In October 2024, federal agents arrested both men after they purchased firearms and ammunition from an undercover FBI worker.
Tawhedi later admitted he bought two AK-47 rifles, 500 rounds of ammunition, and 10 magazines for the planned attack. A criminal complaint affidavit revealed he had asked an ISIS facilitator whether 500 rounds would be enough for the shooting.
Abdullah Haji Zada pleaded guilty and received a 15-year federal prison sentence. Tawhedi pleaded guilty in June 2025 to two terrorism-related crimes, including conspiring to provide resources to ISIS.
The family's preparation went beyond weapons. Starting in 2024, they began selling furniture, computers, a mobile phone, and both of their vehicles to fund the attack. Nazira Haji Zada herself signed the contract to sell the family's house. The family also secured one-way airplane tickets she would have used to fly to Afghanistan with the children shortly before the planned assault.
That sequence, sell everything, arm up, buy exit tickets, is the conduct the DOJ now points to in arguing Haji Zada was not a bystander but a participant. The administration has made immigration enforcement a central priority, and this case represents its most aggressive legal tool yet.
The Alien Terrorist Removal Court is not a household name, and for good reason. Congress established it three decades ago as part of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, but no administration, not Bush's after September 11, not Obama's, not Trump's first term, ever filed a case there.
The court is composed of five judges appointed by the chief justice to serve five-year terms. Only one judge is needed to grant the government's application. The process begins when the attorney general submits a sealed application. If the court accepts it, a public hearing follows. The accused is represented by counsel. The government provides an unclassified summary of its information, while classified material stays shielded from public disclosure.
That design is the point. As Assistant Attorney General for National Security John A. Eisenberg put it in the DOJ's press release:
"The ATRC embodies the recognition that the government should not have to choose between allowing a dangerous alien to remain in the United States and disclosing sensitive classified information in a traditional removal proceeding."
Under federal law, membership in a terrorist organization, endorsing terrorist activity, or intending to participate in activities that could endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States can all result in an individual being prosecuted as a terrorist for removal purposes. Standard deportation proceedings apparently posed a risk of exposing sensitive intelligence in this case, hence the ATRC route.
The Trump administration has shown a willingness to use executive authority aggressively across multiple fronts, from sweeping trade enforcement to national security. Activating a court that sat empty for 30 years fits that pattern.
Chief Judge Ericksen issued an order earlier this week accepting the government's application. She wrote that there was "probable cause to believe that the Respondent has been correctly identified and is an alien terrorist present in the United States."
The judge acknowledged the legal tension between national security deference and judicial independence. Quoting Supreme Court precedents, she wrote that while those precedents "make clear that concerns of national security and foreign relations do not warrant abdication of the judicial role," courts should still show "respect for the Government's conclusions" when drawing factual inferences in this area.
She described the litigation as being at an "early stage of the multi-phase process" and called combating terrorism "an urgent objective of the highest order." At Thursday's hearing, Haji Zada's attorney moved to dismiss the case. Ericksen denied the request.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche framed the filing in direct terms:
"The allegations in this case show the matriarch of an ISIS-sympathizing family aiding in a plot to launch a mass casualty attack on American voters on Election Day. The Department's application in this court makes clear that terrorists have no place in the United States of America."
Blanche also noted the broader significance of dusting off the ATRC, saying Congress created the court "three decades ago to remove from the United States alien terrorists who never should have been here in the first place." The administration's posture on foreign nationals who pose security threats has been consistent, whether the issue involves diplomatic standoffs with local officials or terror-linked deportation cases.
Several facts remain unclear. The DOJ has not publicly detailed what classified information necessitated the use of the ATRC rather than standard immigration proceedings. Haji Zada's current immigration status, whether she entered on a visa, held a green card, or arrived through the refugee system, has not been disclosed in available filings. Her defense attorney has not been publicly identified.
Tawhedi's sentence following his June 2025 guilty plea has not been reported. And while the arrests in October 2024 clearly disrupted the plot before Election Day, the DOJ press release does not explicitly state how close the attack came to execution.
The FBI's Oklahoma City field office posted about the filing on X, writing: "#HappeningNow: The U.S. Department of Justice just filed its first case in Alien Terrorist Removal Court (ATRC) against Nazira Haji Zada, for her role in a plot to commit an ISIS-inspired mass shooting on Election Day in 2024." The administration has not been shy about publicizing its enforcement actions across agencies.
Congress built this court for exactly this kind of case. It took 30 years and an alleged plot to massacre voters for someone to finally use it. The only real question is why it took so long.
