President Donald Trump gestures as he boards Air Force One at Morristown Municipal Airport, in Morristown, N.J., Sunday, Aug. 2, 2026, en route to return to Washington (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin).
The Trump administration is refusing to provide key discovery to defense counsel in the first-ever case tried before a specialized court meant to adjudicate immigrants charged with terror-related offenses, according to attorneys for the woman accused.
In a nine-page motion to compel discovery, attorneys for Nazira Haji Zada, 47, allege the U.S. Department of Justice has kept "classified evidence used against" their client under wraps despite her counsel having a security clearance that allows them to view such material.
"Lawful permanent residents, like Ms. Haji Zada, are protected by the United States Constitution," the discovery motion begins. "These protections extend to immigration proceedings."
At the outset, the motion cites a litany of precedents in which "lawful permanent residents" have been provided relevant immigration-related protections under the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, and 14th Amendment.
But, Zada's attorneys note, many constitutional protections are available to immigrants regardless of their status.
"All immigrants—not only lawful permanent residents—'receive constitutional protections when they have come within the territory of the United States and developed substantial connections with this country," the motion goes on, citing the U.S. Supreme Court. "Even undocumented or 'unlawful' immigrants enjoy some constitutional protections."
Still, for purposes of the present case, the motion says "lawful permanent residents receive greater constitutional protections."
In the present case, the DOJ alleges Zada was "the matriarch of an alien Afghan family" who was plotting to have several family members moved "to ISIS controlled territory in Afghanistan" while her son and son-in-law carried out an Election Day mass shooting.
That would-be attack – which was ultimately foiled – would then be claimed as a victory for ISIS, according to the DOJ.
The underlying conspiracy resulted in the arrest of Zada's son, Abdullah Haji Zada, and son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, in October 2024. The younger Zada and Tawhedi later pleaded guilty to firearms and terrorism offenses, respectively.
The charges against Zada were originally announced on July 15 – with an announcement provided to the novel court itself. On July 30, the DOJ declassified an FBI ATRC application and revealed the outlines of the case.
Now, the accused woman's attorneys say they need more information — while accusing the DOJ of violating her constitutional rights.
"The government now ignores all of Ms. Haji Zada's rights by detaining her based on evidence that it will not permit even her cleared counsel to review," the motion continues. "This is a plain violation of due process with a plain remedy—the government must make the evidence used against Ms. Haji Zada in its application to bring this case and evidence that will be presented against her to justify her continued detention available to cleared counsel."
Zada's attorneys are also asking the court to act with haste, saying they need to view the material before a release hearing on Aug. 11.
The motion stresses the issue, at length:
If the status quo continues, Ms. Haji Zada, and her counsel, will walk into the…hearing completely blind to the information that allegedly supports the government's detention and removal requests-information that has been (or will be) reviewed by the Court. Undersigned counsel will argue in favor of Ms. Haji Zada's release but without having had any opportunity to review or challenge the evidence that is being presented in favor of her continued detention. This is a blatant violation of 8 U.S.C. §1534 and the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
The motion accepts that "the procedures" of the Alien Terrorist Removal Court (ATRC) "are generally lacking in due process." But, Zada's attorneys argue, the originating statute for the court provides for exactly what is being requested.
"The Alien Terrorist Removal Court statute provides that all respondents must be given the 'reasonable opportunity to examine the evidence against [them] and to cross-examine any witness,'" the motion goes on.
Zada's attorneys, however, stress the issue is statutory and constitutional.
"For Ms. Haji Zada's release hearing to comply with the strictures of due process, the government must, at a minimum, make the evidence that has been and will be presented against her available for cleared counsel review," the motion continues. "The critical components of due process are notice and the opportunity to be heard. The government's refusal to make any of the evidence which has been secretly presented against Ms. Haji Zada available for review plainly deprives her of both pillars of due process."
The Trump administration, for its part, has declined to provide the requested information "absent an order from the Court," the motion says.
Congress created the ATRC in 1996 — well before the 9/11 terror attacks — as a body with special jurisdiction to review and assess deportation cases against accused noncitizen terrorists residing in the country.
The court is made up of five U.S. District Court judges hand-selected by the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court who serve "staggered, renewable five-year terms and must be drawn from different judicial circuits," according to the Federal Judicial Center (FJC).
Comments