# 美国司法部首次向1996年设立至今从未启用的「外国人恐怖分子撤销法庭」提交请愿
> 特朗普政府于7月19日向这一秘密法庭提交请愿，这是该休眠三十年的法庭设立以来首次被启用。该法庭旨在无需向当事人披露机密证据即可驱逐被指控从事恐怖活动的非公民

**Meta:** type: event · date: 2026-07-19 · heads: 谁说了算, 什么崩了 · 10 takes · 7 lenses · 1 regions

## 摘要

据美联社通过ABC新闻的报道，美国司法部于7月19日向1996年设立、已休眠30年的外国人恐怖分子撤销法庭(ATRC)提交首份请愿。ATRC依据《反恐与有效死刑法》设立，允许美国政府利用不向当事人披露的机密证据，驱逐被指控参与恐怖活动的非公民，绕过标准的美国移民法院系统。请愿涉及的当事人身份未予公开。特朗普政府自2025年起扩大了对国家安全法律工具的运用，以加快移民执法。

## 重要性

ATRC的启动是该法庭成立以来首次就其允许政府在驱逐案件中提交机密证据的特殊程序进行实际检验。如请愿程序继续推进，将为机密证据在移民遣返案件中的使用方式确立法律先例，而这正是美国法院从未通过这一具体机制加以解决的问题。

## 值得关注的动向

- ATRC是否受理请愿并排定听证日期
- 可能透露更多请愿对象信息的法庭文件
- 公民自由团体就ATRC机密证据程序提出的法律挑战
- 国会的反应，尤其是来自一直关注移民执法扩张的议员

## Regional takes (batched by bias / lens)

### US newswire; first wire to report the petition, framing the ATRC as a "secretive and dormant" 30-year-old mechanism that has never been tested in practice
- **ABC News / Associated Press** (United States, en) — ABC新闻通过美联社率先报道了这一消息：美国司法部向30年前设立的一家法庭提交首份请愿，该法庭负责审查政府驱逐被指控恐怖主义的非公民的申请。美联社将ATRC定性为「一项休眠30年、从未经过实际检验的秘密机制」，并指出请愿对象的身份尚未公开，将此事件置于特朗普政府移民执法扩张的背景下加以解读。
  > "特朗普政府向一家三十年前设立的秘密休眠法庭提交首份请愿，该法庭专门审查政府驱逐所谓「外国人恐怖分子」的申请。"
  Source: https://abcnews.com/US/wireStory/justice-department-activates-untested-court-alien-terrorist-deportations-134890428

### US conservative media; framed the ATRC activation as a "historic" use of a "Clinton-era" national security weapon designed to bypass what it called activist immigration courts
- **Breitbart News** (United States, en) — 布莱特巴特将司法部的行动报道为刻意绕过所谓活动人士移民法庭所造成的僵局的策略，将ATRC称为「30年前设立的强力国家安全武器」。报道突出了特朗普政府的政治定性，将请愿描述为对阻碍性法律机制的打击，而非一次程序上的首创。
  > "司法部向外国人恐怖分子撤销法庭提交请愿，要求驱逐一名尚未公开身份的恐怖主义嫌疑人。"
  Source: https://www.breitbart.com/border/2026/07/19/first-ever-trump-taps-clinton-era-alien-terrorist-removal-court-for-dangerous-migrant-deportations/

### US immigration law practitioner; explained the ATRC's procedures and their implications for non-citizens, including the right to secret evidence proceedings
- **Shautsova Immigration Law** (United States, en) — 纽约一家移民法律事务所发布说明，向非公民解释ATRC启用的实际影响，详细介绍了该法庭的特殊程序，包括不向当事人披露的机密证据程序。这份从法律从业者视角撰写的说明，填补了通讯社和党派媒体报道的空白，这些报道均未涉及对当事人法律权利的影响。
  > "外国人恐怖分子撤销法庭在美国历史上首次启动：每位非公民须知事项。"
  Source: https://shautsova.com/2026/07/19/alien-terrorist-removal-court-activated-for-the-first-time-in-u-s-history-what-every-noncitizen-needs-to-know/

### unlabelled
- **KSAT 12** (United States, en) — 
  Source: https://www.ksat.com/news/national/2026/07/19/justice-department-activates-untested-court-for-alien-terrorist-deportations/
- **CNBC** (United States, en) — 
  Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/19/justice-department-activates-court-for-alien-terrorist-deportations.html
- **Local 10 News** (United States, en) — 
  Source: https://www.local10.com/news/2026/07/19/justice-department-activates-untested-court-for-alien-terrorist-deportations/
- **The Washington Times** (United States, en) — 
  Source: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/jul/19/trumps-justice-department-activates-untested-court-alien-terrorist/

### US legal press covering appellate and immigration courts; reported the first-ever ATRC hearing was held and the judge concluded DOJ still had more work to do before the case could proceed
- **LawDork** (United States, en) — LawDork reported that after the first hearing ever convened by the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, the presiding judge concluded the DOJ still had more work to do, adding a procedural wrinkle to the administration's effort to use the dormant mechanism. The legal press account provides the courtroom perspective absent from the AP and political coverage.
  > "After the first hearing ever convened by the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, the judge concluded DOJ still had more work to do."
  Source: https://www.lawdork.com/p/trump-doj-secret-deportation-court-atrc

### US national-security law journal; unpacks the ATRC's first case, what is publicly known about the subject, and what precedents the proceeding may set
- **Just Security** (United States, en) — Just Security published a legal analysis of the ATRC's first case, reviewing what is known about the proceeding, what the secret-evidence framework means in practice, and which aspects of the court's operation merit monitoring. The national-security law focus provides procedural depth absent from general news coverage.
  > "Unpacking the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, what we know about its first case, and what to watch for going forward."
  Source: https://www.justsecurity.org/148285/the-alien-terrorist-removal-courts-first-case/

### Constitutional law scholar's newsletter; explains why the ATRC's activation should and should not cause concern, from an academic civil-liberties perspective
- **Steve Vladeck's One First** (United States, en) — Steve Vladeck's legal newsletter argued that while the ATRC's activation is genuinely significant, public concern should be calibrated: the court's procedures include judicial oversight, and the administration's ability to use it as a mass-deportation tool is more limited than early coverage suggested. The academic framing counterbalances both alarmist and celebratory political coverage.
  > "The Trump administration has activated a secret 30-year-old court that's never been used. Here's what we know, and why we should (and shouldn't) be worried."
  Source: https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/239-the-alien-terrorist-removal-court

## Across the graph
- Entities: Person:donald Trump, United States

---
Canonical: https://rbtfl.xyz/zh/n/atrc-deportation-0719