RAICES Bulletin: Government Turns to Never-Before-Used Court in Latest Anti-Immigrant Move
By RAICES Public Affairs Director Javier Hidalgo, Esq.
TL;DR The Department of Justice (DOJ) has submitted the first-ever application to the secretive but never used, 30-year-old Alien Terrorist Removal Court (ATRC) in an attempt to deport an unnamed noncitizen. Although the presiding judge declined to rubber-stamp the initial application, there are due process concerns and signals a hostile new strategy in immigration enforcement.
WHAT TO KNOW
Issue: The DOJ is attempting to use the ATRC to deport an unnamed non-citizen. Established 30 years ago, this specialized court remained entirely dormant until the administration filed its first-ever petition in mid-July 2026. The ATRC Judge declined to rubber-stamp the application, instead directing the DOJ to provide additional facts and legal analysis.
Rationale: Congress established the ATRC in 1996, modeling it after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court. It allows the DOJ to submit a sealed (secret) application to deport suspected "alien terrorists," their families, or individuals deemed national security threats. If the initial application is approved, the target receives a public hearing to challenge the determination. The court consists of five Article III district judges from different circuits, with appeals sent to the D.C. Circuit.
RAICES Impact: Currently, there is no indication that additional noncitizens have been targeted for removal through the ATRC process. However, legal aid organizations should remain vigilant and proactively advise clients to report any unusual government communications or documents. Legal advocacy groups should assess their internal capacity to provide representation during public or appellate hearings in federal court should any clients become subjected to this unprecedented and complex removal procedure.
Community Impact: Use of the ATRC will likely exacerbate fear and confusion within immigrant communities. The inherently secretive nature of the initial application process is particularly alarming, though the statute may mandate the appointment of counsel for individuals with certain immigration status. A broader shift toward this court would risk individuals being deported based entirely on secret evidence known only to the government and the judge.
Related Legal Battles: Last year, the administration tried to deport over 100 Venezuelan nationals in J.G.G. v. Trump by unilaterally labeling their alleged transnational gang a terrorist organization. In those proceedings, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg noted the ATRC's existence, signaling that the administration cannot bypass the judicial system to deport individuals without using the proper statutory framework.
Broader Immigration Strategy: Scholars believe the ATRC went unused for decades because its reliance on secret, classified evidence raises severe constitutional due process concerns. The administration’s attempt to use the ATRC signals a hostile, exclusionary strategy and invites fresh legal challenges. However, because this approach is entirely novel and untested, a proactive strategy by legal advocates could establish vital, protective precedents.
