An Afghan woman accused of supporting the Islamic State has been deported from the United States in the first case to be pursued by the U.S. Department of ​Justice through a little-known court created 30 years ago to deport “alien terrorists.”

Nazira Haji ‌Zada, a 47-year-old who had been residing in Texas as a lawful permanent resident of the United States, was deported after agreeing not to continue to fight against her removal in the Alien Terrorist Removal Court following her ​arrest in July, the department said on Friday, Reuters reported.

The Justice Department had accused her of ​helping conceal a failed, Islamic State-inspired plot to commit a mass shooting on ⁠Election Day 2024. She was never charged with any crime, but her son and son-in-law ​pleaded guilty to related charges last year.

Her case had been filed in a court that had ​gone unused in the decades since its creation by Congress in 1996. That court allows the government to rely on classified evidence in deportation cases.

Her attorney initially argued the secretive process violated her due process rights. Defendants ​in such cases are not allowed to review the classified evidence used against them.

But according to ​court documents unsealed on Friday, Haji Zada agreed last month that she was an “alien terrorist” subject to removal. ‌The ⁠court’s chief judge, Joan Ericksen, subsequently approved her deportation, opens new tab.

“This landmark case, resulting in the prompt removal of this alien terrorist to her country of origin, is a win for national security and the rule of law,” U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement.

The case marked the latest in ​a series of aggressive ​moves by President Donald ⁠Trump’s administration to carry out deportations as part of an immigration crackdown.

It was unclear, though, whether the Justice Department would use the obscure court ​again anytime soon.

Matthew Farley, a public defender who represented Haji Zada, ​in a statement ⁠said her “choice to consent to removal should not be seen as an endorsement of this court’s legitimacy.”

“Dragging lawful permanent residents into court but refusing to show them or their attorneys the evidence that ⁠will be ​used against them is a plain violation of due ​process,” he said. “We are confident that the Alien Terrorist Removal Court will be struck down as unconstitutional as soon as a ​judge is asked to address the issue.”