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.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 17 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 | Elijah Ephraim Jhirad v. Thomas E. Ferrandina, United States Marshal, Southern District of New York | green | “it is not the business of our courts to assume the responsibility for supervising the integrity of the judicial system of another sovereign nation. such an assumption would directly conflict with the principle of comity upon which extradition is based.” | 4 |
| 3 | 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 |
| 4 | Elijah Ephraim Jhirad v. Thomas E. Ferrandina, United States Marshal, Southern District of New York | green | “supervising the integrity of the judicial system of another sovereign nation.” | 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.