A legal permanent resident from Afghanistan, Nazira Haji Zada, is facing deportation in the first-ever case in the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, which was activated by the Trump administration after 30 years of dormancy. Her lawyers argue that the court’s procedures violate due process and are unconstitutional.
Constitutional Challenge
Haji Zada’s lawyers claim that the court’s procedures for handling classified information are ‘woefully inadequate’ and that the unclassified summary of the case provided to her was insufficient. The government alleges that Haji Zada has ISIS sympathies and assisted her son in a thwarted terror plot targeting the 2024 Election.
The court’s chief judge, Joan Ericksen, denied a request for Haji Zada’s immediate release and said that the constitutional issues will be briefed alongside other legal disputes in the case. The judge expressed a commitment to moving forward with the case while upholding the Constitution.
The case may set a precedent for the use of the Alien Terrorist Removal Court and could lead to months or years of litigation over its constitutionality. The Trump administration’s decision to activate the court has sparked a major test of its authority and the rights of legal permanent residents.
Original reporting: KEYT (Ventura/Santa Barbara) — read the source article.
