The Justice Department has deported a 47-year-old Afghan woman accused of supporting an ISIS-inspired mass shooting plot on Election Day 2024, the first successful use of a specialized terrorism court Congress created nearly 30 years ago.
Nazira Haji Zada, a lawful permanent resident living in Fort Worth, Texas, admitted before the U.S. Alien Terrorist Removal Court that she was an "alien terrorist," waived her right to appeal, and was removed to Afghanistan, where she is now permanently barred from returning to the United States. The court issued its removal order on August 20, Fox News reported.
The case stems from an alleged family terror plot. Zada's son, Abdullah Haji Zada, and her son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, were arrested in October 2024 after buying guns and ammunition from an undercover FBI agent. Both men admitted to purchasing AK-47 rifles to carry out a mass shooting on behalf of the Islamic State, timed for Election Day 2024.
Abdullah Haji Zada has already been sentenced to 15 years in federal prison and will be deported to Afghanistan upon release. Tawhedi, who pleaded guilty to planning a mass-casualty attack, AP News reported, is still awaiting sentencing. Both men were convicted in Oklahoma.
The family allegedly sold furniture, vehicles, and their home to fund the attack. They purchased one-way tickets to Kabul for family members, everyone except the two men who planned to carry out the shooting. Nazira Haji Zada was among those set to flee before the planned massacre, Just The News reported.
The DOJ has not publicly detailed every specific action Zada took to support the plot beyond the family's coordinated preparations. But federal officials left no ambiguity about how they view her role.
Attorney General Todd Blanche framed the case in stark terms:
"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 added that "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 will use every tool at its disposal to protect our country."
The administration's willingness to activate a dormant legal mechanism fits a broader pattern. Federal authorities have doubled daily immigration arrest rates in recent months, signaling that enforcement tools once left on the shelf are now in active rotation.
The Alien Terrorist Removal Court was established as part of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. Congress designed it as a specialized federal tribunal to determine whether a non-citizen qualifies as an "alien terrorist" and should be removed from the country. For nearly three decades, no administration, not after September 11, not during the rise of ISIS, ever brought a case before it.
That changed in July 2025, when the DOJ filed its first petition with the court. Zada was arrested at her Fort Worth home that same month, the Washington Examiner reported. The court had never received a petition before.
FBI Director Kash Patel called the deportation a "historic and vitally important step in our work to protect the U.S. homeland from terrorism."
Patel went further in a separate statement:
"An individual who supported a plot by ISIS-sympathizing family members to commit an attack in America has paid the price for that. 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 announcement came on the 25th anniversary of the September 11 attacks, Breitbart reported, timing the administration clearly chose with care.
Zada's defense attorneys, who were not named in public reporting, pushed back hard on the proceedings. They argued that the ATRC's structure violates due process because it allows the government to withhold evidence from the accused and their counsel.
The lawyers issued a statement saying Zada's decision to consent to removal "should not be seen as an endorsement of this court's legitimacy." They went further:
"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."
They predicted the court would not survive judicial review. "We are confident that the Alien Terrorist Removal Court will be struck down as unconstitutional as soon as a judge is asked to address the issue," the defense team said.
That constitutional challenge never materialized in Zada's case. By admitting she was an "alien terrorist" and waiving her appeal, she avoided a prolonged legal fight, and spared the government from having to defend the ATRC's procedures in open court. Whether a future case forces that reckoning remains an open question.
Previous administrations left significant legal tools unused when it came to removing noncitizens who posed security risks. The Biden White House, for instance, drafted memos aimed at shielding millions of noncitizens from deportation, a posture that stands in sharp contrast to the current approach.
The ATRC sat dormant through the deadliest terrorist attack in American history, through the Boston Marathon bombing, through the Pulse nightclub massacre, through the San Bernardino shooting. No administration petitioned it. No attorney general activated it. Congress built the tool in 1996, and every Justice Department for three decades left it in the drawer.
The current administration's decision to finally use the court carries both practical and symbolic weight. Practically, it gives federal prosecutors another avenue to remove noncitizens linked to terrorism, one that operates outside the standard immigration court system. Symbolically, it signals that legal authorities gathering dust are now fair game.
Courts have also begun clearing other legal barriers to removal. A federal judge recently lifted the last legal obstacle to ending Temporary Protected Status for certain noncitizen groups, part of a broader shift in how the judiciary is handling immigration enforcement disputes.
Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin reinforced the administration's position. "Those who plot acts of terrorism against the United States have no place in our country," Mullin said.
Meanwhile, federal enforcement operations continue to accelerate. ICE agents have arrested convicted criminals across the country in recent weeks, and the administration has recorded an unprecedented streak of zero border releases, a pace of enforcement not seen in decades.
Several questions remain unanswered. The specific evidence the ATRC considered in Zada's case has not been made public. Whether the government will bring additional cases before the court, and whether a future defendant will force a constitutional ruling on its procedures, is unknown. The identity of the presiding judge has not been disclosed.
For 30 years, Congress gave the federal government a tool to remove terrorists from American soil, and no one picked it up. It took an ISIS-inspired family plot to massacre voters on Election Day to finally change that.