A Case for the Due Process Right to a Speedy Extradition

Abstract

Some lower courts have held that there is no due process right to a speedy extradition. Courts ground this conclusion on categorical and formalistic arguments that ignore the current realities of extradition proceedings and the modern jurisprudence on procedural due process. These arguments are also similar to doctrines in immigration and national security law that have fallen out of favor with the Court. This Article argues that the categorical distinctions used to consider due process challenges in extradition proceedings are inconsistent with current developments in the law of due process. It also argues that courts should apply the balancing test of Mathews v. Eldridge when considering procedural safeguards in international extradition just as the Court has done in recent immigration and national security cases. Applying Mathews to issues of extradition delay shows that procedural safeguards similar to those the Court has adopted for criminal cases in Barker v. Wingo and United States v. Lovasco are appropriate in international extradition.

Keywords: international extradition, speedy trial, due process