The Terrorist Alien Removal Court (ATRC) on Friday ordered the removal of an Afghan woman in her very first deployment after achieving one agreement with the US Department of Justice (DOJ). Nazira Haji Zada was accused of helping her son and son-in-law plan a foiled terrorist attack in 2024 and had admitted that she was an alien terrorist.
Congress created the ATRC Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, That was one of the answers to that Oklahoma City Terrorist attack in 1995. According to the Brennan Center for JusticeThe ATRC is a specialized court for the deportation of immigrants suspected of involvement in terrorist activities.
Congress did this because it feared that standard deportation procedures would not hide secret evidence. Congress further strengthened protections for confidential evidence by restricting immigrants’ access to the government’s evidence against them in an omnibus consolidated appropriations bill. Public Law 104-208in September 1996.
The deportation of Nazira Haji Zada was the ATRC’s first operation in its 30 years of existence, so the court is still in the process of developing its procedures. The Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court selects the five justices from five different judicial districts. All judges are federal judges who also work at the court Court for the supervision of foreign intelligence services.
A case reaches the ATRC in two steps. In the first case, the DOJ applies the motion by establishing probable cause that a person is engaged in “terrorist activity” as defined Section 212(a)(3)(B) the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The definition is broad and flexible as it can include children and spouses and include any type of transportation or accommodation. A”terrorist organization“is defined as any group of two or more people who used a weapon or vehicle to damage property. In the second step, a request may go to a deportation hearing, which uses a higher standard of proof and in which the immigrant can contest the charge.
However, the court offers immigrants far less protection than defendants in regular criminal proceedings. The standard of proof is only a “preponderance of the evidence” and not “beyond a reasonable doubt.” The Federal Rules of Evidence do not apply to ATRC, and defendants may not object to “the fruits of electronic surveillance and unauthorized physical searches.” The case will be heard by a single judge and there is no right to a jury trial.
An immigrant would not have the right to deal with all the evidence, and the Justice Department does not have to disclose or even summarize the secret evidence against an immigrant. However, the Brennan Center notes that this limitation has not been widely tested and that some Dishes have determined that secret evidence cannot be used to justify the detention of immigrants.
In one Press releaseAttorney General Todd Blanche called the case “a victory for national security and the rule of law.”
