The court has existed for nearly three decades without being used. A sealed DOJ application could define how far the government can go when national security evidence is kept from the person facing removal.
The Justice Department is trying to use a secretive federal immigration court that has never been used before to deport a suspected terrorist. The Alien Terrorist Removal Court was created by Congress in 1996 to remove noncitizens accused of terrorism using classified evidence, including evidence the person may not be allowed to see. This case is a test of the court’s legal limits and deportation powers because it could turn a paper-only national security tool into an active path for removal.
The first known application, filed July 15 and largely sealed, asks a judge to permit removal under a process separate from ordinary immigration court and far short of a criminal trial. The judge has already asked the Justice Department for more information, signaling that even this secretive process may not be a rubber stamp.
A dormant court wakes up
The Alien Terrorist Removal Court was designed for a narrow but explosive problem: what happens when the government says a noncitizen should be removed for terrorism-related reasons, but the evidence is classified and cannot be aired publicly?
For almost 30 years, the answer was largely theoretical. The court existed in statute, with judges appointed to serve on it, but the government had not used it to complete a removal case. Immigration attorney Eric Lee described it to CBS News as a “zombie” court because it existed only on paper.
That changed when the Justice Department filed its first application seeking removal of an alleged “alien terrorist.” The filing was reported by Court Watch and later appeared after a website for the court went live, according to CBS News.
The substance of the case remains mostly hidden. The identity of the respondent, the alleged conduct and the classified evidence supporting the government’s request have not been publicly disclosed.
How the secret process works
This court is not a criminal court. The government is not seeking a conviction or prison sentence through this process. It is seeking permission to remove a noncitizen from the United States based on a terrorism-related legal standard.
Under the law, only the attorney general may approve an application to begin an Alien Terrorist Removal Court case. A federal judge assigned to the court then decides whether the government has met the required threshold.
The Justice Department must show probable cause that the person is a noncitizen who meets the legal definition of an “alien terrorist” and poses a national security threat. The filings are largely sealed and reviewed by the judge and the government.
The respondent may hire a lawyer. If the person is a lawful permanent resident, the government can appoint an attorney with a security clearance. But the system sharply limits access to classified evidence, and the person targeted for removal may not be allowed to review the evidence being used against them.
The due-process fight ahead
The core tension is obvious: the government says some terrorism evidence cannot be made public without risking national security, while civil liberties and immigration advocates argue that removal based on secret evidence threatens basic fairness.
Targets of these proceedings, including green card holders, are not allowed to challenge how the government collected the classified evidence, CBS News reported. That is a major difference from criminal cases, where defendants can often contest searches, surveillance and other investigative methods.
Lee warned that the case could cross constitutional lines if the executive branch can detain someone in the United States based on secret evidence and arguments the person cannot hear. His concern is not just about this respondent; it is about the precedent the first successful use of the court could set.
Other legal experts see the structure differently. Aram Gavoor, a former national security attorney in the Justice Department’s Civil Division, told CBS News that the court’s Article III judges provide a serious check. He argued that the secrecy concern is counterbalanced by experienced federal judges who are unlikely to cut corners.
The judge wants more answers
The first signs from the court suggest the Justice Department still has work to do. Chief Judge Joan Ericksen, who is based in federal court in Minnesota and leads the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, has asked the department to supplement the record.
After a sealed July 16 hearing, Ericksen wrote that the court had questions about the connection the government alleged between the respondent’s actions and the specific legal provisions the Justice Department invoked. That request matters because it shows the court is examining the fit between the facts and the statute, not simply accepting the government’s national security framing.
If the judge denies the application, the government can appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. If the application is approved, the court would be required to hold a public removal hearing, though it remains unclear how much of the underlying evidence would ever become public.
The Justice Department declined to provide details of the sealed case. A spokesperson told CBS News the department would use every tool available to bring “alien terrorists” to justice and remove them from the United States, including the court Congress established in 1996.
Why this case matters now
The filing arrives during a broader push to expand immigration enforcement and use national security authorities more aggressively. The administration has designated known drug cartels and criminal gangs as foreign terrorist organizations, a move that can strengthen the government’s hand in certain removal cases.
The Justice Department also previously tried to use the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport suspected members of Tren de Aragua, the Venezuelan criminal group. That strategy met judicial resistance, and Chief Judge James Boasberg of the federal district court in Washington, D.C., suggested that sensitive national security removal disputes may belong in the Alien Terrorist Removal Court.
That comment now looks less theoretical. By turning to the 1996 court, the Justice Department is testing whether a dormant legal mechanism can become a practical tool for modern immigration enforcement.
The court’s structure resembles the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which reviews secret national security surveillance applications. All five judges on the Alien Terrorist Removal Court also serve on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, according to CBS News. That overlap may reassure those who trust national security judges, but it will deepen concerns among critics who object to secret evidence in proceedings that can remove a person from the country.
What remains unknown
The biggest facts are still sealed. The public does not know who the respondent is, what conduct the government alleges, what classified evidence exists or whether the person is a lawful permanent resident. Those details matter because the legal and constitutional stakes can change depending on the person’s status and the government’s evidence.
It is also unclear how often the Justice Department might use the Alien Terrorist Removal Court if this first case succeeds. A narrow ruling tied to unusual facts would have one kind of impact. A broader approval could invite more applications in cases involving classified intelligence, terrorism designations or foreign organization links.
For now, the case is less a finished precedent than a stress test. Congress built the court to solve a national security problem. The Justice Department now wants to use it. A federal judge is asking for more. The answer will help define how much secrecy the legal system can tolerate when deportation is on the line.
Leave a Reply