The Supreme Court just stripped thousands of immigrants of their right to due process – vox.com

Supreme Court Ruling on Immigration and Torture Protections: Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Overview of the Supreme Court Decision

On Monday evening, the Republican justices of the United States Supreme Court issued a short, one-paragraph order in the case of Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D. This order permits President Donald Trump to effectively nullify a federal law and an international treaty designed to protect immigrants from torture. The Court’s order is temporary and allows the administration to deport immigrants to countries where they may face torture while the case is fully litigated. The majority did not provide an explanation for their decision, though Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by two Democratic colleagues, filed a detailed 19-page dissent.

Legal Context and Treaty Obligations

Federal law prohibits the United States from expelling, extraditing, or involuntarily returning any person to a country where there are substantial grounds to believe they would face torture. This law implements the Convention Against Torture, an international treaty ratified by the United States over thirty years ago.

Despite these protections, the Trump administration’s legal team argues that a loophole allows them to bypass these laws for certain immigrants.

Immigration Hearing Process and the Loophole

1. Noncitizens facing removal are typically entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge.
2. The judge informs the immigrant of possible countries of deportation, allowing objections based on fear of torture.
3. If objections are serious, the judge may permit deportation but exclude countries where torture is feared.

In the D.V.D. case, immigrants have undergone this process, and the judge ruled they could be deported but not to specific countries. However, the Trump administration announced plans to deport these individuals to other countries not previously considered, without a new hearing or opportunity to object.

Risks of Deportation to Unsafe Countries

• The administration appears to have selected countries where immigrants face significant danger, such as South Sudan, which has recently experienced civil war and ongoing instability.
• Others are slated for deportation to Libya, where violence and opposition to their arrival pose serious risks.

This strategy effectively creates a deadly trap, circumventing protections under the Convention Against Torture by deporting immigrants to nations with potentially greater risks of torture and violence.

Implications for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

• The ruling challenges the commitment to uphold justice and human rights by allowing deportations that may lead to torture, undermining the rule of law and international agreements.
• It raises concerns about the protection of vulnerable populations and access to fair legal processes.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• The decision disproportionately affects immigrants and asylum seekers, exacerbating inequalities and social exclusion.
• By circumventing legal protections, the ruling may increase vulnerability among marginalized groups.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• Deporting individuals to countries with ongoing conflict and violence threatens their physical and mental health.
• Exposure to torture and unsafe conditions directly contradicts efforts to ensure well-being for all.

SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

• The case highlights the importance of international cooperation and adherence to treaties like the Convention Against Torture.
• Undermining such agreements weakens global partnerships aimed at promoting human rights and sustainable development.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s temporary order in Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D. raises significant concerns regarding the protection of immigrants from torture and the United States’ compliance with international human rights treaties. The decision has profound implications for multiple Sustainable Development Goals, particularly those related to justice, equality, health, and international cooperation. Ongoing litigation and scrutiny will be essential to ensure that the rights and safety of vulnerable populations are upheld in alignment with global sustainable development commitments.

1. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Addressed or Connected

1. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • The article discusses the protection of immigrants and noncitizens from torture and unsafe deportation, which relates to reducing inequalities and ensuring fair treatment for vulnerable populations.
2. SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions
   • The article highlights issues related to justice, legal protections, and the rule of law, particularly concerning immigration law and human rights protections against torture.
3. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • The risk of torture and violence in deported countries impacts the physical and mental health of immigrants, linking to the goal of ensuring health and well-being.

2. Specific Targets Under Those SDGs Identified

1. SDG 10 – Target 10.7: Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.
2. SDG 16 – Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
3. SDG 16 – Target 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development.
4. SDG 3 – Target 3.4: Reduce premature mortality from non-communicable diseases and promote mental health and well-being.

3. Indicators Mentioned or Implied to Measure Progress

1. Indicator 10.7.2: Number of refugees and migrants who have received protection against torture or inhumane treatment, as per international treaties and national laws.
   • Implied by the discussion on the Convention Against Torture and the legal protections for immigrants.
2. Indicator 16.3.1: Proportion of victims of violence who reported their victimization to competent authorities or other officially recognized conflict resolution mechanisms.
   • Implied by the legal hearings and judicial processes immigrants undergo before deportation.
3. Indicator 16.b.1: Proportion of population reporting having personally felt discriminated against or harassed in the previous 12 months on grounds of migration status.
   • Implied by the article’s focus on discriminatory deportation practices.
4. Indicator 3.4.2: Suicide mortality rate and other indicators of mental health risks.
   • Implied by the risk of torture and violence impacting immigrants’ mental health and well-being.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: vox.com