Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 26 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Glucksman v. Henkel.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Glucksman v. Henkel Anchor | green | “we are bound by the existence of an extradition treaty to assume that the trial will be fair.” | 8 |
| 2 | Hoxha v. Levi | green | “serves interests of international comity by relegating to political actors the sensitive foreign policy judgments that are often involved in the question of whether to refuse an extradition request.” | 4 |
| 3 | United States v. Daniel James Fowlie | green | “a highly complex legal institution” | 3 |
| 4 | Sacirbey v. Guccione | green | “a duly authenticated copy of the warrant of arrest,” | 3 |
| 5 | Sacirbey v. Guccione | green | “the only state organ not denying possession of the case but rather affirming its possession was the office of the national prosecutor.” | 3 |
| 6 | Hilton v. Kerry | green | “bars courts from evaluating the fairness and humaneness of another country's criminal justice system, requiring deference to the executive branch on such matters.” | 3 |
| 7 | Hoxha v. Levi | green | “sensitive foreign policy judgments” | 2 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.