AP News51%

Justice Department activates untested court for ‘alien terrorist’ deportations 25%

By ERIC TUCKER37%

7/19/2026, 1:40:05 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 6 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Biased Writer Voice, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 23.6% saturation with 34 hits. Analysis detected 180 faulty-reasoning hits from 144 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 38% and a BS Rank of 25% (14,082 of 18,719 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 75.20% of the article peer group.

WASHINGTON (AP)  The Trump administration has filed a first-ever petition to a secretive and dormant court created 30 years ago to consider government requests to deport so-called “alien terrorists” from the United States. 
The Alien Terrorist Removal Court was established in 1996 but had never received a petition until this past Wednesday, when the Justice Department filed an application seeking the removal of an individual whose name is withheld from the single-page document posted on the court’s website. 
The court has been dormant since its creation, having received  until last week  no applications and conducting no hearings, according to a summary posted on the Federal Judicial Center website. 
It is comprised of five judges selected by Chief Justice John Roberts. 
The petition was first reported by Court Watch, an independent news site. 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
8.3%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
23.6%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
23.6%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
22.2%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
23.6%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
23.6%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

144 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.