In Secret Documents,Justice Department Warns Judge over Marine’s Adoption of Afghan Orphan UPDATED

“The U.S. government has warned a Virginia judge that allowing an American Marine to keep an Afghan war orphan risks violating international law and could be viewed around the world as “endorsing an act of international child abduction,” according to secret court records reviewed by The Associated Press.

It is rare for the federal government to step into a local custody case, but concern about the child’s fate has stretched across the Trump and Biden administrations. The Justice Department argued in the court documents that the dispute has ramifications that extend far beyond the rural courthouse where the girl’s future is being decided.

Failing to return the child, now 4, to Afghan relatives in the U.S. could jeopardize American efforts to resettle Afghan refugees, threaten international security pacts and might be used as propaganda by Islamic extremists — potentially endangering U.S soldiers overseas, Justice Department attorneys and other U.S. officials warned in court filings seeking to intervene in the case.

The Justice Department was particularly scathing in its assessment of how Marine Maj. Joshua Mast and his wife convinced a Virginia judge to sign off on the adoption of the girl, who has been in their custody since 2021.

Citing a litany of “falsehoods,” the Justice Department wrote that the court relied on “intentional misrepresentations” from the Marine and skipped critical safeguards to protect children being brought to the United States.

“The grave harm that the Masts have inflicted upon the Child, her family, and the United States is ongoing,” Justice Department lawyers wrote in the court documents, which included signed declarations from State and Defense department officials. “Most troublingly, the child remains with the Masts to this day.”

The documents were filed under seal this summer in the bitter custody battle over the child who was pulled by U.S. forces in 2019 from the rubble of a military raid.
Mast, who was on a short assignment as an attorney in Afghanistan, met the baby in a U.S. military hospital and became determined to bring her home.

The Masts and the girl’s Afghan relatives, who are suing to get her back, have been ordered not to speak publicly about the case, and their lawyers did not respond to requests for comment.

But in earlier court filings, Mast’s attorneys have written that the Marine and his wife acted in good faith and worked at “great personal expense and sacrifice” to protect the baby and “provide her a loving home.”

Until now, the federal government’s role in the case has remained mostly a mystery. The government filings reviewed by the AP represent just a fraction of the thousands of pages of documents, transcripts and exhibits that remain under seal, locked away with no word of when the public will be allowed to see them.

The AP in January took legal action to unseal the case and a Virginia judge agreed to do so. Yet nine months later, the documents remain secret. It is unclear how the Masts responded to the Justice Department’s court filings.

In arguing that the girl should be returned to her Afghan relatives, the Justice Department wrote that the Masts, who were living in Fluvanna County at the time, convinced their local circuit court judge Richard E. Moore in 2019 that the child — 7,000 miles away — was the “stateless” daughter of foreign fighters from an unknown neighboring country, and that the Afghan government intended to waive jurisdiction over her. A year later, Moore, who has since retired, made the adoption permanent.

The child, however, was never “stateless,” the Afghan government did not relinquish its claim over her, and the orders “were obtained fraudulently by the Masts, who knowingly made false representations before the Virginia courts,” the Justice Department wrote.

Virginia law requires that whoever has physical custody of a child be given an opportunity to be heard in an adoption case. But the Virginia court failed to notify the U.S. government of Mast’s custody petition, the Justice Department argued.

At the time, the baby was in the custody of the U.S. government, being treated at a military hospital in Kabul. The Afghan government was tracking down relatives, a State Department official wrote, and found an uncle who reported that the girl’s father, a farmer, had been slain in the raid, along with his wife and five other children.
The documents reveal for the first time that concern about Mast’s actions — and the court’s decisions — reached the highest levels of the Trump administration. When the U.S. Embassy in February 2020 was working with the Afghan government to unite the child with her surviving relatives, Mast tried unsuccessfully to stop them, claiming the Afghan family was not biologically related.

Then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo signed a cable to the embassy in Kabul that described Mast’s custody order from Fluvanna County as “flawed in a number of respects,” and questioned how any American court could have jurisdiction over an Afghan child.

Pompeo’s cable said the State Department had “concerns about the perception of the U.S. government holding an Afghan child against the will of her extended family and the Afghan government.”

The Red Cross took her to the Afghan family, who wept when they met her, according to a State Department declaration attached to the court filings. A young newlywed couple, the child’s cousin and his wife, raised her for the next 18 months.

The Justice Department declined to comment. The State Department referred AP to a prior statement saying it has acted appropriately by supporting efforts to find the girl’s surviving kin and reunify the family in Afghanistan.

As the family grew and bonded, Mast tracked them down and tried to convince them to send the child to the United States by promising medical care, the Afghan family told AP last year. They said they refused to go along with the plan; they didn’t want to be separated from the girl, who appeared to have fully recovered from a fractured skull, broken leg and serious burns.

Later, in the summer of 2021, when U.S. troops withdrew from Afghanistan and the Taliban took over, Mast reiterated his offer of assistance, “misleading” the couple into believing the child would receive specialized medical treatment, the Justice Department wrote. Mast helped arrange a Defense Department evacuation of the Afghan family by “falsely telling other military personnel that he was clear to bring the Child,” the Justice Department wrote.

When the Afghans arrived at a refugee resettlement camp in Virginia, the Justice Department wrote, Mast presented the adoption order to federal employees, who didn’t know that the U.S. government had already deemed his claim to the girl to be flawed. Unwittingly, those employees helped Mast take custody of the child, and she’s been with him ever since.

Fluvanna County Circuit Court Judge Claude Worrell, who took over the case, has said the government shoulders some blame for the girl ending up in the Masts’ custody. He noted multiple federal employees and agencies helped Mast along the way.

The left hand of the United States is doing one thing and the right hand of the United States is doing something else,” Worrell said.

Mast is assigned to the Marine Corps Special Operations Command at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, and the agency is fully cooperating with federal law enforcement investigations, according to a spokesperson. Earlier, a Marine official said at least one investigation focused on the alleged unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material. Records indicate that the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI have also been involved.

Worrell voided the adoption in March, but left the child with the Masts, citing a custody order. That decision has been appealed by the Masts.

In the meantime, the Biden administration argued in the filings that ongoing delays and “a narrative that a U.S. servicemember stole a Muslim child” are harming America’s standing on the world stage, particularly in Afghanistan, where the U.S.’s withdrawal left a fragile nation behind.

“The perception that the United States is a place where Afghan children can be taken from their families, over their families’ objection, without effective recourse, increases those perceived risks,” a State Department official wrote in a declaration, “to the detriment of U.S. foreign policy interests.”

In Secret Docs, Govt Warns Judge Over Marine’s Adoption Of Afghan Orphan
[Huffington Post 9/15/23 by AP/MARTHA MENDOZA, CLAIRE GALOFARO and JULIET LINDERMAN]

REFORM Puzzle Piece

UPDATE:“Marine Corps Major Joshua Mast and his wife Stephanie are embroiled in both federal and state lawsuits over their adopted daughter, five-year-old “Baby L.,” as she has been called in court filings.

An Afghan Pashtun couple claiming to be related to Baby L. are suing the Masts for custody of the child in state court and filed another lawsuit over tortious interference with parental rights, fraud, common law conspiracy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and false imprisonment in federal court. The Afghan couple are referred to as “John Doe” and “Jane Doe” in the federal lawsuit.

Found near her mother, an Al Qaeda fighter who died wearing suicide vest.
Baby L. was saved after a U.S. Special Forces operation was conducted in Afghanistan on Sept. 5-6, 2019, against Al Qaeda foreign fighters, according to an unclassified military report. Despite the Army Rangers allowing the foreign fighters to surrender, only one of them surrendered and was detained. The other foreign fighters fired on the Army Rangers and were killed during the firefight.

Baby L. was less than two months old when Army Rangers found her by her mother, who was one of the Al Qaeda foreign fighters and died from her wounds after setting off a suicide vest she was wearing.

“This infant was assessed to be the daughter of the female fighter and one of the barricaded shooters whose suicide vest had detonated, due to the proximity and layout of the [compound],” per the military report.

Baby L. “suffered a fragmentation wound to the lower extremity which had fractured her hip, and she sustained a fractured skull and 2nd degree burns,” the report added.

Unlike Afghan Pashtuns, Baby L. “is most likely ethnically Turkmen or a Uighur from Turkmenistan,” according to the report.

A former Army Ranger who was part of the Special Forces operation where Baby L. was found told CBS News in January 2023 that the Afghan partner forces “wanted me to throw the baby into the river ’cause they believed she was a terrorist.” Instead, he and six other Army Rangers told the media outlet that they used scraps and medical equipment to make a car seat for the infant and took her to Craig Joint Theatre Hospital at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan.

“Fought for the child’s rights to safety”

Baby L. stayed at the hospital for about five months, according to a court filing from last August by Mast’s brother, Richard, in the federal court case. Richard Mast has been representing his brother in the state court case, and is a defendant along with the Masts in the federal case.

However, Mast learned about Baby L.’s situation and “grew concerned that Baby Doe, a foreign female infant in Afghanistan being treated in a Military Hospital under consistent rocket attack, would not have access to the medical care required to treat her injuries.”

Mast, who was in Afghanistan at the time, “fought for the child’s rights to safety, medical treatment, and to not be turned over by the US to non-relatives in an objectively dangerous manner” his lawyers said.

He and the DOD “demanded at a minimum a DNA test for any claimants and vetting for terrorist ties. The DoD was well aware [of] the risk that unrelated Taliban proxies would step forth as ‘uncles’ to try to claim the child.” At least six Afghans claimed to be family members of Baby L., but DNA tests proved otherwise.

Over the course of late 2019 and early 2020, and with his command’s knowledge, Mast worked with a Virginia court, the Virginia Department of Health, and the Virginia attorney general’s office to obtain a birth certificate for Baby L. and an Interlocutory Order of Adoption so she could be brought to the U.S., per the court filing.

Later, in July 2021, the Taliban would not give permission for Baby L. to go to the U.S., after a request from the father of John Doe, who has claimed to be Baby L.’s uncle.

“John Doe admitted that his father was responsible to the Taliban for the child, and that the Taliban had denied permission for the child to go to America prior to the start of the historical evacuation,” according to the filing. “In addition, it is appalling that U.S. Embassy Kabul would fail to keep a U.S. Forces, Afghanistan (USFOR-A) commitment to DNA test any claimant when the former Afghan government expressly requested it.”

Disobeying the Taliban

After the State Department became involved in the situation, Baby L. was transferred from DOD custody to John Doe’s father in February 2020. The Masts continued with the adoption process of Baby L.

“The Does were fully aware of the Masts’ intention and manifested belief that it was in the child’s best interest to live with the Masts,” according to Richard Mast’s court filing.

Richard Mast also argues in his answer to the Does’ federal lawsuit that the Afghan family had never met Baby L. before Feb. 27, 2020. They also “never sought or obtained an Afghan court order in their favor as parents, adoptive parents, guardian, or custodian” and “never provided a DNA sample from John Doe,” according to the court filing.

The Does disobeyed the Taliban, leading Mast to help evacuate them along with Baby L. from Afghanistan to Germany on the way to the U.S. Baby L. remained with the Does as they traveled to the U.S., where they arrived at Dulles International Airport on August 29, 2021. “John Doe was identified on the unclassified Biometrically Enabled [Terror] Watchlist (BEWL) upon his entry to the United States for a 2014 arms/explosives use,” according to the filing.

As a result, the Masts, who have four sons, were given custody of Baby L. on Sept. 3, 2021.

The Does, who live in Texas, sued the Masts for custody of Baby L. with the help of “Gitmo Bar, attorneys who love to fill out their ‘pro bono’ time by representing jihadists and attacking our armed forces and Christians,” according to the American Freedom Law Center, which is representing Richard Mast.

The couple claims that they didn’t know the Masts were adopting Baby L.

“After they took her, our tears never stop,” Jane Doe told The Associated Press in October 2022. “Right now, we are just dead bodies. Our hearts are broken. We have no plans for a future without her. Food has no taste and sleep gives us no rest.”

A gag order has been in place for the state case for about two years, preventing all parties in the lawsuit from discussing it.

In judicial limbo
In July, a Virginia appellate court voided the Masts’ adoption of Baby L. However, the Masts appealed the decision to the Virginia Supreme Court, and Baby L. has remained in their custody as the case continues. For its part, Project ANAR, which is affiliated with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, led a letter in June 2023 calling for an investigation into Mast.

Regarding the lawsuits over Baby L., Mast told CBS News ahead of the gag order, “Her everything is at stake. We’re gonna continue to defend her like we would do with any of our other children.”

In October 2022, the Taliban posted a video alleging that Mast “forcefully” took Baby L., vowing to “seriously pursue” the issue with “American authorities” so the child is “returned to her relatives,” according to CBS News’ translation.

“I think when the Taliban calls you out by name, and agrees with your opponents about what should happen to this little girl, that’s the point we’re gonna start fighting back,” Mast told the media outlet.

Last October, allegations were made that the Masts stole “an Afghan baby girl from the battlefield” and adopted her – despite knowing she has blood relatives able to care for her after the death of her innocent villager parents. An administrative Marine Corps Board of Inquiry (BOI) found those allegations to be false.

The BOI rejected the serious allegations against Mast of making “false official statements,” a “‘substandard performance of duty’ (for failing to demonstrate leadership),” and failing to obey general orders.

The board “‘substantiated’ a technical violation of Article 123 (“misuse of a government computer”) for the Marine maintaining mission documents on his classified government computer from his 2019 deployment in Afghanistan and from his time at the Marine Forces Special Operations Command.” As a result, “the BOI also ‘substantiated’ the tack-on of Article 133 ‘conduct unbecoming an officer.’”

The BOI has allowed Mast to remain on active duty.

Lawyers for the Masts and the Does didn’t provide comment by publishing time.”

Marine fights to maintain custody of adopted girl saved by Army Rangers from Afghan battlefield
[Just The News 1/17/25 by Natalia Mittelstadt]

“A Marine accused of illegally adopting an Afghan refugee urged the Fourth Circuit Wednesday to vacate a protective order shielding the identities of the child’s family.

An Afghan couple accused Virginia-based U.S. Marine Corps attorney Joshua Mast and his wife, Stephanie, of abducting the husband’s child’s cousin. According to the couple, the child, referred to as Baby Doe in court proceedings, was orphaned at two months old after her parents and five siblings were killed during a U.S. military operation in rural Afghanistan in September 2019.

The parties have litigated extensively in state and federal courts since the Afghan couple filed suit in 2022 seeking $10 million in damages for conspiracy, tortious interference with parental rights, assault, fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress and false imprisonment.

Before the federal litigation, Bill Clinton-appointed U.S. District Judge Norman Moon granted a protective order allowing the Afghan couple and the baby to proceed under pseudonyms out of fear for the safety of the plaintiffs’ family members in Afghanistan. Two years later, Moon found the Masts in civil contempt in 2024 after the U.S. couple sent photos of the child to a nonprofit, which posted the pictures on its website and social media accounts for a legal fundraising campaign.

The Masts did not appeal the civil contempt order; instead, they appealed Moon’s 2024 ruling, which denied their attempt to lift the protective order. The Masts argue the protective order, which they label a gag order, unfairly allows the public to scrutinize them without knowing the identities of the plaintiffs.

“The gag order is particularly onerous because plaintiffs have repeatedly identified themselves to the news media to generate substantial negative publicity against the Masts and to falsely accuse the Masts of ‘kidnapping,’ which are the subject of the Masts’ counterclaims for defamation and related torts,” the Masts wrote in their brief.

The Masts contend the protective order is subject to strict scrutiny under the First Amendment. To survive a strict scrutiny analysis, the judge must narrowly tailor the order, and it must serve a government interest.

In denying the motion to lift the order, Moon referenced the safety concerns posed to Afghan couples’ families who still live under Taliban rule. According to the husband, if the Taliban learn that they had moved to the United States, they would suspect they worked with the U.S. government.

Attorney John Moran of McGuire Woods, representing the Mast, said the couple’s willingness to speak with the media undermines their claims.

“I personally consider it remarkable in my experience to have an order restricting out-of-court statements in a context where the very party that sought those restrictions is giving media interviews in order to further a public media scrutiny of their case that is designed to tilt public opinion,” Moran said.

Attorney Kevin Elliker of Hunton Andrews, representing the Does, disagreed that the order stops the Masts from participating in public discourse.

“This is not a case about whether the Masts can go and tell their side of the story, about whether they can go and raise money for a legal defense,” Elliker said. “It is simply about protecting the identities of our clients.”

Donald Trump-appointed U.S. Circuit Court Judge Julius Richardson sounded sympathetic to the Masts’ effort, stating he believed Supreme Court case law indicates that prior restraints face even stricter restrictions than the strict scrutiny analysis.

“It’s a gag order,” Richardson said.

Richardson pointed to the Fourth Circuit’s ruling in a 2018 case concerning a gag order that imposed stringent restrictions on participants and potential participants in a series of nuisance suits brought against the hog industry in North Carolina.

“Can you tell me the reason why that was a gag order subject to strict scrutiny and this order is not?” Richardson asked. “There is no difference between what that order did and what this order does with respect to a restraint on speech.”

Elliker responded that his clients view protective orders and gag orders differently.

Fellow Clinton-appointed U.S. Circuit Court Judge Robert King asked the Masts how they had jurisdiction to appeal the protective order. Moran asked the three-judge panel to view the order as an injunction. An order refusing to dissolve an injunction is subject to appeal.

The Virginia Court of Appeals voided the adoption in 2024, ruling that the Masts were granted custody after misrepresenting facts to a local custody court, which also lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to issue the order. The Masts appealed the ruling and presented arguments to the Supreme Court of Virginia in February. The state’s high court has yet to issue a ruling.

Mast learned of Baby Doe when serving a short stint as an attorney in October and became concerned with the child’s well-being. By then, the U.S. Forces-Afghanistan had begun coordinating the child’s return to her uncle with help from the International Committee for the Red Cross and officials from the Afghan Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs.

Despite being privy to family reunification efforts, Mast petitioned for custody of Baby Doe in the Fluvanna County Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court. Mast testified that the child was stateless, the search for relatives was unsuccessful, and the child was in urgent need of medical treatment.

At the Afghan government’s request, the U.S. planned to move the child to her uncle’s custody in early 2020. Mast moved for a restraining order to prevent the transfer but was found unlikely to succeed on the merits. Baby Doe was put under the care of her uncle, who transferred guardianship to his son and his wife.

Mast didn’t give up and employed a fellow attorney practicing in Afghanistan to convince the family to send the child to the United States for medical treatment. After the Afghan government collapsed on Aug. 15, 2021, and following more than a year of communication, the couple agreed to come with the child to the United States.

The U.S. under former President Joe Biden claimed that during the chaos of evacuating the country, Mast falsely informed U.S. personnel that the child was his daughter, per both Afghan and U.S. court orders, and provided them with a fraudulent document that he described as an Afghan court order. The child was taken from the Afghan couple when they arrived at Fort Pickett in Virginia in compliance with the Fluvanna court’s final adoption order.

Barack Obama-appointed Chief U.S. Circuit Court Judge Albert Diaz completed the panel. Moran and Elliker did not respond to requests for comment.”

Marine asks Fourth Circuit to lift anonymity in Afghan refugee adoption case
[Courthouse News 9/10/25 by Joe Dodson]

Baby Doe (AKA Baby Sparrow) has been separated from her Afghan family. Here is how you can get involved: Project ANAR