The Supreme Court's order in Department of Homeland Security v. D. V. D threatens the rule of law by failing to provide reasoning for its decision. The case involved attempts by DHS to deport aliens to third countries without notice or due process, risking exposure to torture. The order lifted a preliminary injunction that protected these individuals, resulting in them being stuck in limbo. This disregard for judicial reasoning undermines the foundational principle that law should be interpreted with thorough explanation and justification.
The act of interpreting the law requires interpretation—not mere pronouncement, but an explanation for that pronouncement, backed up by law, evidence, and logic.
The Supreme Court's order in Department of Homeland Security v. D. V. D. is a threat to the rule of law, a reward for defiance, and a horrific example of a judicial process off the rails.
Trump's process denied them the opportunity to prove that they had a 'credible fear' of harm and to argue that sending them there violates the Convention Against Torture.
This disregard for explanation is destructive to the idea that law matters.
Collection
[
|
...
]