DOJ activates Alien Terrorist Removal Court for deportations

Axios carries several procedural facts that the others do not. It says that even at the public hearing, “the person facing removal and the public don’t have the right to see classified evidence,” though DOJ must provide “an unclassified summary.” It also says normal federal evidence rules do not apply and that the law “explicitly allows the U.S. to use illegally obtained evidence.” Guardian, Newsmax and Breitbart describe sealed filings or classified intelligence, but not those two limits on the respondent’s access and evidence rules. Axios also adds that DOJ considered “100 possible cases by 2000 and rejected all of them,” because ordinary immigration charges were sufficient; that history is absent from Guardian, Newsmax and Breitbart. The right-side gap runs the other way on appeals: Breitbart alone says ATRC rulings can be appealed to the D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court, a detail Axios, Guardian and Newsmax do not include. Breitbart also alone asserts the court “could be used” against “nearly 4o0 illegal aliens” admitted during the Biden-era border crisis; no other outlet mentions that number. The language split is especially stark around Breitbart. Axios calls this a “never-before-used federal court” and Guardian/Newsmax call it a “secretive and dormant court”; Breitbart calls it a “powerful, 30-year-old national security weapon,” an “emergency wartime tool,” and “total institutional warfare.” Breitbart’s headline says “Dangerous Migrant Deportations,” while its own text says the person is “as-yet unidentified” and that the “alleged terrorist and specific threats are not disclosed.” The basic unanswered question is the same everywhere: who is the respondent, what conduct is alleged, and what statutory subsections are being invoked? Axios says the one-page filing omits the name, alleged conduct and cited provision; Guardian and Newsmax quote Judge Ericksen questioning the “nexus”; Breitbart says the application is “completely redacted.”