2026-09-11T15:37:33.262Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
作者：蒂尔尼·斯尼德、埃文·佩雷斯
发布于 2026年9月11日，美国东部时间上午11:37
时任司法部副部长托德·布兰奇于11月出席司法部新闻发布会。
安德鲁·哈尼克/盖蒂图片社/档案照片
这是唐纳德·特朗普总统任内的一项胜利，美国司法部周五宣布，其通过“外国恐怖分子驱逐法庭”首次成功完成驱逐行动。该秘密法庭今年夏天由本届政府激活，此前从未被启用过。
根据司法部的一份新闻稿，娜齐拉·哈吉·扎达——一名被司法部指控协助其子和女婿策划2024年未遂恐怖袭击的阿富汗女性——已承认自己属于外国恐怖分子并被驱逐回祖国。驱逐令由该法庭首席法官琼·埃里克森签署。
这名女性的律师此前曾表示，他们将对该法庭的合宪性提出质疑，指控其程序违反了正当程序保护及多项其他宪法修正案。不过目前尚不清楚这些法律争议是否在法庭批准驱逐哈吉·扎达前得到了充分审理。在8月公布一批公开文件后，公众案卷近几周已无更新。
相关报道 2026年4月7日，美国司法部总部华盛顿特区办公区的讲台上展示着美国司法部公章。肯特·西姆里克/法新社/盖蒂图片社/档案照片
特朗普政府激活已有30年未审理过案件的法庭后面临首次重大考验 阅读时长：4分钟
该法庭由国会于30年前设立，旨在让联邦政府在常规移民诉讼可能泄露国家安全机密的情况下，快速驱逐被指控的恐怖分子。
周五发布的新闻稿显示，在7月30日该法庭首次公开听证会之后的某个时间点，法官批准了驱逐令，而这名女性并未提起上诉。
“这一具有里程碑意义的案件，将这名外国恐怖分子迅速遣返回其原籍国，是国家安全和法治的胜利，”司法部长托德·布兰奇在新闻稿中表示。“那些支持和纵容恐怖主义的人不应在美国生活，这起外国恐怖分子驱逐法庭的首例案件表明，司法部将动用所有可用工具保护我们的国家。”
该法庭的程序允许司法部向公众甚至向被驱逐的移民本人隐瞒政府认定其为外国恐怖分子的机密信息，这一身份在移民法中有明确定义。案件由第三十条法官审理，与常规驱逐诉讼中由行政分支移民法官审理相比，这些法官被认为更具独立性。
历届政府从未试图启用该法庭，或许是因为没有哪个驱逐案件敏感到值得冒着被裁定法庭违宪的风险。
法律观察人士一直在质疑本届政府为何现在选择启用该法庭。
根据法庭文件，这名被驱逐的阿富汗女性居住在达拉斯，不会说英语，也不识字。
她的儿子因获取武器以支持恐怖组织目前正在服15年刑期，已对该项指控认罪。她的女婿——法庭文件中称其为这场与“伊斯兰国”相关的恐怖袭击策划的主谋——在公诉中达成了认罪协议，但尚未被宣判。
在司法部向外国恐怖分子驱逐法庭提交的关于哈吉·扎达的少量公开文件中，司法部称她一直在向其家人灌输“伊斯兰国”意识形态，并采取行动支持其子针对2024年大选的恐怖计划。
“这是我们保护美国国土免受恐怖主义威胁工作中具有历史意义且至关重要的一步，”联邦调查局局长卡什·帕特尔在新闻稿中表示。“一名支持同情‘伊斯兰国’的家庭成员在美国发动袭击的人，已经为其行为付出了代价。”
Justice Department secures deportation of Afghan woman through secretive ‘Alien Terrorist’ court
2026-09-11T15:37:33.262Z / CNN
By Tierney Sneed, Evan Perez
PUBLISHED Sep 11, 2026, 11:37 AM ET
Then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche attends a news conference at the Justice Department in November.
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images/FILE
In a victory for President Donald Trump, the Justice Department announced Friday that it secured a first-of-its-kind deportation through the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a secretive tribunal that had never been used before the administration activated it this summer.
Nazira Haji Zada — an Afghan woman who was accused by the department of assisting her son and son-in-law in planning a foiled 2024 terror plot — was deported to her home country after conceding that she was an alien terrorist, according to a DOJ press release that said an order for her removal was signed by the court’s chief judge, Judge Joan Ericksen.
Lawyers for the woman had previously indicated they were challenging the constitutionality of the court, alleging its procedures violated due-process protections and an assortment of other constitutional amendments. It is unclear, however, whether those legal questions were fully aired before the court approved Haji Zada’s deportation. The public docket had gone quiet in recent weeks, after a round of public filings posted in August.
Related article The seal of the US Department of Justice is displayed on a podium at the Department of Justice headquarters in Washington, DC, on April 7. Kent Nishimura/AFP/Getty Images/File Trump administration faces first major test after activating court that hasn’t heard a case in 30 years 4 min read
The court was created by Congress 30 years ago as a way for the federal government to quickly deport accused terrorists in situations where using the normal immigration proceedings risked exposure of national security secrets.
Friday’s press release indicated that at some point after the first-ever public hearing in the court on July 30, a removal order was approved by the judge and the woman decided against appealing it.
“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,” Attorney General Todd Blanche said in the press release. “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 court’s procedures allow the Justice Department keep hidden from the public — and even from the immigrant they’re seeking to deport — classified information about why the government believes them to be an alien terrorist, a designation defined in immigration law. The cases go before Article III judges, who are seen as more independent than the Executive Branch immigration judges who consider routine deportation proceedings.
Past administrations had never sought to use the court, perhaps determining that no deportation case was so sensitive that it was worth risking a ruling finding the court unconstitutional.
Legal observers have questioned why the administration sought to use it now.
The Dallas-based Afghan woman who was deported did not speak English, and could not read or write, according to court filings.
Her son is currently serving a 15-year sentence for obtaining firearms to support a terrorist organization, having pleaded guilty to the charge. Her son-in-law — described in court filings as the driving force behind the ISIS-aligned terror plot — reached a plea deal in the prosecution but has not yet been sentenced.
In the sparse public filings the government submitted about Haji Zada to the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, DOJ described her as indoctrinating her family with ISIS ideology and taking steps to support her sons’ terror plans, which targeted the 2024 election.
“This is a historic and vitally important step in our work to protect the U.S. homeland from terrorism,” FBI Director Kash Patel said in the release. “An individual who supported a plot by ISIS-sympathizing family members to commit an attack in America has paid the price for that.”
发表回复