MELBOURNE — Australia's High Court on Wednesday unanimously dismissed an appeal by an Iranian man against an order deporting him to Nauru, with all seven judges ruling against the challenge. The man, identified in court only as TCXM because refugees' identities are protected in Australia, had argued that the deportation order, which included a 30-year visa to the Pacific island nation, was unlawful and unconstitutional.

Immigration Minister Tony Burke, who had contested the appeal, issued a statement welcoming the ruling. "I welcome the decision of the court. A canceled visa must have consequences in our migration system," Burke said.

TCXM came to Australia from Iran in 1990 and was given a protection visa in 1995. He was sentenced in 1999 to 22 years in prison for murdering his wife. His visa was canceled in 2015, when he was transferred from prison to immigration detention, where he remained for eight years. He is now in his early 60s.

Iran does not accept the forced repatriation of its citizens by other governments, and Australia has a policy of not returning refugees to countries where they risk persecution. In 2023, the High Court found that stateless people or people who could not be returned to their homelands could no longer be held indefinitely in Australian detention without the prospect of a third country offering a home. More than 350 people were released in Australia on temporary visas as a result of that 2023 ruling.

TCXM was one of the first three noncitizens chosen to be sent to Nauru, an independent nation with a population of around 12,000, under a bilateral deal. Australia agreed last year to pay Nauru 408 million Australian dollars for resettlements of noncitizens, with an annual payment of AU$70 million. Eight men have been resettled in Nauru under the deal so far.

TCXM's legal challenge was rejected by a federal court judge before reaching the High Court. His grounds for appeal included that Nauru's medical services were inadequate to treat his severe asthma, and that Australia's agreement with Nauru was unlawful and his deportation was punitive and therefore unconstitutional. Australia's constitution says punishment must be dealt by courts and never by governments. He was allowed to stay in Australia while he fought the legal challenge. Australian governments previously paid Nauru and Papua New Guinea to house asylum seekers who attempted to reach Australia's shore by boat in detention camps.