Woman whose case awakened long-dormant US court has been deported
Por Eric Tucker and Michael Kunzelman — – World RSS Feed
Woman whose case awakened long-dormant US court has been deported
Attorneys for Nazira Haji Zada said that her decision to consent to removal ‘should not be seen as an endorsement of this court’s legitimacy’
Eric Tucker & Michael Kunzelman Friday 11 September 2026 16:52 BST
- Bookmark
Bookmark popover
Removed from bookmarks
Close popover
Your support helps us to tell the story
Read more Support Now
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference. Read more
An Afghan woman who was accused of supporting an Islamic State-inspired plot in the United States has been deported, ending a case brought before an obscure and long-dormant federal court.
Nazira Haji Zada, 47, was arrested in July at her home in Fort Worth, Texas, and brought before the Alien Terrorist Removal Court following a Justice Department petition to deport her from the U.S. On Friday, officials confirmed she had waived her rights to contest her detention and agreed to be deported.
It remained unclear immediately when or to what location she was deported.
Attorneys for Haji Zada noted that her decision to consent to removal “should not be seen as an endorsement of this court’s legitimacy.”
“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 lawyers said in a statement Friday. “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 swift conclusion avoids what could have become a protracted legal battle testing the authority of the court—which was created in 1996 but had not received any petitions prior to July—along with the strength of allegations against Haji Zada.
Attorney General Todd Blanche described the resolution of the case as “a win for national security and the rule of law.”
“Those who support and condone terrorism should not be living in the United States, and this first-ever case before the (court) shows how the Department will use every tool at its disposal to protect our country,” Blanche said in a statement.
The Justice Department has characterized Haji Zada as a supporter of the Islamic State, identifying her as the mother and mother-in-law of two Afghan nationals convicted in Oklahoma for planning a 2024 Election Day attack in the U.S. That plot was thwarted before any attack took place.
At the time of her deportation, her legal team had been urging the court to compel the Justice Department to share details and other evidence backing the allegations in the case.
The court holds specialized authority to conduct deportation proceedings against individuals categorized by the Justice Department as “alien terrorists.” The panel is made up of five federal judges from various districts across the nation who are appointed by the U.S. chief justice.
“Those who plot acts of terrorism against the United States have no place in our country,” Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said in a statement. “We will find them, and we will use every lawful tool available to remove them.”
On July 30, Judge Joan Ericksen presided over the inaugural hearing for the court’s very first case since its establishment 30 years ago.
One of Haji Zada’s lawyers argued during the proceeding that the Trump administration’s activation of the court violates her constitutional rights. Defense attorney Matthew Farley requested that the judge dismiss the case and order his client’s immediate release.
An FBI memorandum dated July 15 indicated that investigators “developed information” showing Zada is an IS supporter who had her children pledge their loyalty to the terrorist group. Her son, Abdullah Haji Zada, received a 15-year prison sentence in November, and court documents show he previously agreed to be removed from the U.S. following his release.
Her son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, who previously worked as a security guard for a U.S. military installation in Afghanistan, pleaded guilty to conspiring and attempting to provide material support to the Islamic State group. Prosecutors stated he took concrete actions to advance his attack plans by ordering AK-47 rifles, liquidating his family’s assets and purchasing one-way flight tickets for his wife and child to travel back to Afghanistan.
More about
Most popular
Popular videos
Bulletin
Read next
Fonte: – World RSS Feed
