周四，公设辩护人率先提出动议，要求驳回外国人恐怖分子驱逐法庭有史以来受理的首起案件。特朗普政府正尝试借助这套从未实践过的法律机制，驱逐一名居住在得克萨斯州的阿富汗女性，美方指控她与 “伊斯兰国” 策划袭击的阴谋有关。
纳齐拉・哈吉・扎达是美国合法永久居民，本周早些时候在得州被捕。检方指控，她协助儿子与女婿，图谋代表 “伊斯兰国” 在 2024 年大选期间发动大规模伤亡袭击。尽管这一阴谋最终被挫败，调查人员称，哈吉・扎达宣誓效忠 “伊斯兰国”，并且向家人灌输极端组织思想。
外国人恐怖分子驱逐法庭是美国国会于 1996 年设立的专门特别法庭，设立初衷是快速驱逐身处美国、对国家安全构成威胁的外籍人员。但该法庭成立 30 年来一直处于休眠状态，此前从未投入使用。
本案大部分卷宗属于涉密材料，对外仅公开一份简短案情摘要。
法庭首席法官琼・埃里克森起初对政府首次启用该法庭的做法持怀疑态度，但最终认定，司法部搜集的证据足以推进案件审理。
司法部高层官员周四对该法庭正式 “开张” 表示肯定，称该法庭能够协助政府处理需要依托涉密证据开展的驱逐案件。
美国联邦调查局局长卡什・帕特尔在司法部声明中称，本次庭审是 “具有历史意义的一步”。
代理司法部长托德・布兰奇表示：“本案指控显示，一个认同‘伊斯兰国’理念家庭的女性家长，参与策划在大选日针对美国选民发动大规模袭击。司法部向该法庭提交申请，清晰表明：美利坚合众国绝不允许恐怖分子立足。”
但哈吉・扎达的两名指定公设辩护人在周四初审中提出抗辩，认为特朗普政府发起的驱逐行动侵犯了哈吉・扎达的正当程序权利。
虽然法官驳回了辩方撤销案件的请求，但周四的庭审也初步显现出，哈吉・扎达将从哪些角度对抗政府这次史无前例的驱逐行动。
辩方律师认为，政府启用该法庭，是在 “绕开常规刑事诉讼程序”、规避正当程序相关法定要求，此举侵犯了哈吉・扎达依据美国宪法第一、第四、第六修正案享有的各项权利。
辩方律师之一、联邦助理公设辩护人马修・法利提出：“仅仅依靠寥寥几段非公开材料摘要，就试图驱逐一名合法永久居民，完全违背正当程序原则。” 他评价政府对外公开的非涉密书面材料 “严重不足”。
美方政府一方则辩称，如果进一步披露证据，会帮助恐怖分子掌握方法，从而规避各类预警与侦查手段。
本次庭审同时也是这座闲置三十年法庭的首次实战演练。
埃里克森法官周四坦言，自己审理本案的方式或许 “不够完善”，承认这套法庭流程尘封三十余年，从未经过实践检验。但她承诺审理过程会保持审慎、周全，恪守宪法准则。
目前法庭尚未确定哈吉・扎达驱逐案正式庭审日期。在此之前，控辩双方将踏入一片全新的法律领域，围绕辩方律师以及公众能够查阅多少涉密材料展开博弈。
埃里克森暗示，她不会轻易认可政府拒绝向辩方移交文件的诉求，检察官若想要封存涉密材料，必须拿出强有力的理由。
Little-known Alien Terrorist Removal Court hears first-ever case in attempt to deport permanent US resident
Public defenders made an early bid on Thursday to toss out the first-ever case brought in the Alien Terrorist Removal Court， where the Trump administration is trying an untested strategy to remove an Afghan woman from Texas they say is linked to an ISIS plot．
Nazira Haji Zada， a lawful permanent resident， was arrested earlier this week in Texas and is accused of helping her son and son-in-law plan a mass casualty attack on behalf of ISIS during the 2024 election． Though the plot was foiled， investigators say Haji Zada pledged loyalty to ISIS and indoctrinated her family with ISIS ideology．
The Alien Terrorist Removal Court is an obscure， specialized court created by Congress in 1996 to quickly move to deport those who are a national security threat and are currently in the United States． However， the court has lain dormant in the 30 years since it was created and has never been used before．
Most of the filings in the case are classified， with only a brief summary of the matter being made public．
Judge Joan Erickson， the court＇s chief judge， initially appeared skeptical of the government＇s attempt to use the court for the first time， but concluded the Justice Department had gathered enough evidence to move forward with the case．
Top Justice Department officials celebrated the inauguration of the court on Thursday， arguing it would help the government prosecute removal cases that rely on classified materials．
FBI director Kash Patel called the proceedings ＂a historic step＂ in a DOJ statement．
＂The allegations in this case show the matriarch of an ISIS-sympathizing family aiding in a plot to launch a mass casualty attack on American voters on Election Day，＂ Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said． ＂The Department＇s application in this court makes clear that terrorists have no place in the United States of America．＂
But Haji Zada＇s two appointed public defenders pushed back during an initial hearing on Thursday， arguing the Trump administration＇s removal effort violated Haji Zada＇s due process rights．
Though the judge rejected their bid to dismiss the case， the proceedings on Thursday provided an early indication of how Haji Zada will contest the government＇s novel attempt to remove her．
Her lawyers framed the government＇s use of the court as a ＂run around＂ of traditional criminal proceedings and a way to skirt due process requirements， saying the government violated Haji Zada＇s First， Fourth， and Sixth Amendment rights．
Assistant Federal Public DefenderMatthew Farley， one of Haji Zada＇s attorneys， argued trying to remove a legal permanent resident ＂based on just a few paragraphs calling the government＇s unclassified filings is absolutely contrary to due process，＂ calling the government＇s unclassified filings ＂woefully inadequate．＂
The government has argued that further disclosure would help terrorists seeking ＂to avoid preventative or detection measures．＂
The hearing was also a trial run for the never-before-used court．
Ericksen， admitted on Thursday that her handling of the case may be ＂inelegant，＂ acknowledging the court＇s procedures are ＂untested＂ after gathering dust for 30 years． But she vowed to be ＂careful＂ and ＂circumspect＂ and promised ＂fealty to the Constitution．＂
A date has not yet been set for Haji Zada＇s removal hearing． Before then， the two parties will wade into uncharted legal waters as they debate what access to classified materials defense counsel and the public are entitled to in this court．
Ericksen indicated she would be skeptical of efforts by the government to keep documents from defense counsel， saying prosecutors would have to make a strong argument for withholding classified materials．
