The Trump administration has filed the first-ever petition to a secretive court created 30 years ago specifically to consider government requests to deport suspected "alien terrorists" from the United States, according to court records and Justice Department filings reviewed by AP.
The Alien Terrorist Removal Court was established under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 but had never received a petition until this past Wednesday, when the Justice Department sought the removal of an individual whose name is being withheld from public documents. The single-page petition was posted on the court's official website.
Chief Judge Joan Ericksen, a federal judge in Minnesota who leads the five-member court, held a hearing on Thursday to consider the application. In a written response, Ericksen said she had "questions about the nexus that the government alleges between the actions of the respondent and the specific sections and subsections it invokes." She directed the Justice Department to provide more information by Wednesday.
The ATRC is comprised of five judges selected by Chief Justice John Roberts and operates largely under seal. Federal law permits the attorney general or deputy attorney general to file sealed applications for deportation of suspected alien terrorists, with the court required to hold public hearings if an application is granted.
What the Left Is Saying
Civil liberties advocates and Democratic lawmakers have raised concerns about the court's secretive nature, noting that it operates largely behind closed doors without the typical procedural safeguards found in standard immigration or criminal proceedings. The American Civil Liberties Union has previously argued that such secret deportation mechanisms raise serious due process questions under the Fifth Amendment.
Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the administration should ensure full transparency if it intends to use this court. "Any deportation proceeding involving national security allegations must include meaningful opportunity for the individual to contest the charges with legal representation," Durbin said in a statement. "Americans deserve to know how and when these powers are being used."
Immigration advocacy groups have pointed to concerns about the definition of "alien terrorist" under federal law, which includes not only those who engaged in terrorist activity but also those who endorse or espouse terrorism or belong to groups that encourage terrorist activity. Critics argue this broad standard could ensnare individuals with tenuous connections to actual violence.
What the Right Is Saying
Administration officials have defended the use of the ATRC as an appropriate legal tool for cases involving national security threats. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the court exists precisely for situations where the executive branch identifies credible terrorist threats and needs a secure forum for deportation proceedings.
The administration's approach has drawn support from Republican lawmakers who argue that previous administrations failed to fully utilize available tools to protect the country from foreign threats. Senator John Cornyn of Texas said in an interview that Congress created this court mechanism for good reason. "If there are individuals in this country engaged in terrorism or providing material support to terrorist organizations, we have a duty to remove them," Cornyn said.
Conservative legal scholars note that the ATRC provides more procedural protections than the Alien Enemies Act, which the administration invoked last year for Venezuelan migrants accused of gang affiliation. Under the 1798 wartime law, individuals can be removed without the public hearings required under the terrorist removal court process.
What the Numbers Show
The Alien Terrorist Removal Court has operated in complete dormancy since its creation three decades ago, according to a summary posted on the Federal Judicial Center website. In that time, it received zero applications and conducted zero hearings before last week's petition, making this the first case in the court's 30-year history.
Federal law sets specific criteria for "alien terrorist" designation: engaging in terrorist activity; endorsing or espousing terrorist activities; or belonging to a political, social, or other group that encourages terrorist activity. The court must find clear and convincing evidence before ordering removal.
The ATRC is one of several mechanisms Congress created in the 1996 antiterrorism legislation following the Oklahoma City bombing. The act also established expedited deportation procedures for certain categories of noncitizens and limited judicial review of removal orders in terrorism-related cases.
The Bottom Line
This first-ever petition to the Alien Terrorist Removal Court marks a significant expansion of the administration's legal strategy for removing individuals it deems national security threats. The court's dormant status means there is no precedent for how these proceedings will unfold, leaving judges to establish procedural norms in real time.
The outcome of Judge Ericksen's review and any subsequent proceedings could set critical precedents for future ATRC cases, potentially determining what evidence the government must present and what rights respondents have in these secretive hearings. Legal observers will be watching closely to see whether the court establishes robust due process protections or defers substantially to executive branch determinations.
The administration has shown willingness to use unconventional legal pathways for deportations, as demonstrated by its invocation of the Alien Enemies Act last year. The ATRC represents a more established — if never used — mechanism specifically designed for terrorism-related removals and may become a preferred tool if courts limit the administration's ability to use older wartime authorities.