United States v. Alvarez-Machain
Significance, Abduction An Option, A Monstrous Decision, Impact, Further Readings
Dr. Humberto Alvarez-Machain
That U.S. courts have jurisdiction over internationally abducted criminal defendants when not taken in explicit violation of an extradition treaty.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Kenneth Winston Starr, U.S. Solicitor General
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Paul L. Hoffman
Justices for the Court
Anthony M. Kennedy, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, Clarence Thomas, Byron R. White
Harry A. Blackmun, Sandra Day O'Connor, John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
15 June 1992
Upheld the United States claim and overturned two lower court's decisions prohibiting the prosecution of a foreign national due to violation of the spirit of an extradition treaty.
- United States v. Rauscher, 119 U.S. 407 (1886).
- Ker v. Illinois, 119 U.S. 436 (1886).
- Frisbie v. Collins, 342 U.S. 519 (1952).
- Medina v. California, 505 U.S. 437 (1992).
- Itel Containers International Corporation v. Huddleston, 113 S. Ct. 1095 (1993).
- United States v. Eichman - Significance, Court Declares Federal Flag Protection Act Unconstitutional, Further Readings
- U.S. v. Helmsley: 1989 - "we Don't Pay Taxes. Only The Little People Pay Taxes.", Suggestions For Further Reading
- United States v. Alvarez-Machain - Further Readings
- United States v. Alvarez-Machain - Significance
- United States v. Alvarez-Machain - Abduction An Option
- United States v. Alvarez-Machain - A Monstrous Decision
- United States v. Alvarez-Machain - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias