This article was prompted when a well-regarded LL.M. candidate at Pace Law School's Center for Environmental Legal Studies was arrested and subjected to extradition proceedings. Faculty, staff, and students became embroiled in efforts, ultimately successful, to challenge the extradition request. In doing so, they confronted the substantive and procedural barriers faced by an accused in current extradition processes and the significant potential for human rights abuses. Thus, this article, which analyzes current extradition law, updates what has been a slowly developing area of the law and proposes changes to address some of the shortfalls. Part II presents a brief history of extradition law, focusing on both the national and international conditions that prevailed when the law developed as well as the ensuing changes in those conditions and laws. Part III explains contemporary extradition law and practice, while Part IV explores the statutory, judicial, constitutional, and international human rights issues related to a party's attempt to resist extradition. Part V focuses on one case, In re Extradition of Victor Manuel Tafur-Dominguez, to illustrate the substantive and procedural issues in current practice and argues that some of the limitations typically placed on the individual are unfair, unwise, unconstitutional, and, even if individually supportable, may in the aggregate violate international human rights norms. Part VI concludes with suggestions for changes to U.S. extradition law and practices that would comport with modern conceptions of individual rights and liberties.
Ann Powers, Justice Denied? The Adjudication of Extradition Applications, 37 Tex. Int'l L.J. 277 (2002), http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/lawfaculty/195/.