Extradition in the USA: Legal Defence Guide

The United States pursues extradition of individuals abroad primarily through bilateral extradition treaties, of which it has approximately 100 in force. The process is governed at the US end by 18 U.S.C. §§ 3181-3196 and the specific terms of the applicable bilateral treaty. At the foreign end, the requested state’s domestic extradition law applies — the US does not control how requesting proceedings are conducted in the foreign jurisdiction, and the substantive standards for refusing extradition vary significantly by country.

A US extradition request is initiated by the Department of Justice and transmitted through diplomatic channels — the US Embassy in the requested state and the State Department — to the foreign government. Many requests are preceded by a provisional arrest request, which asks the foreign state to arrest and detain the individual while the full extradition request is prepared. Provisional arrest requests are often made on the basis of an INTERPOL Red Notice issued at US request.

In extradition proceedings before the foreign court, US Department of Justice attorneys — typically working with local counsel in the requested state — present the extradition request. The foreign court applies its domestic extradition law and the applicable treaty standards. The US has no direct control over foreign court proceedings and cannot compel a foreign court to extradite. Decisions against the US by foreign courts are final in that jurisdiction, though the US may pursue alternative enforcement options.

The US federal court system asserts broad extraterritorial jurisdiction — US prosecutors have charged individuals with federal offences based on a wire transfer routed through a US correspondent bank, a single entry into US territory, or use of US-based internet infrastructure. Foreign courts conducting dual criminality analysis do not always find that this broad US jurisdictional basis produces conduct that would be criminal in their jurisdiction. German, Swiss, and French courts have refused US extradition requests in financial crime cases where the US connection was insufficient under the requested state’s dual criminality standards.

The specialty rule — a standard provision in US extradition treaties — requires that an extradited person be tried only for the offences on which extradition was granted. US prosecutors sometimes charge broadly at the extradition stage to preserve maximum flexibility post-extradition. Where new charges are brought after surrender that were not included in the extradition request, the specialty rule provides a basis for challenging those charges. The rule applies to both criminal prosecution and, in many treaties, to any punitive action — including consecutive sentencing on pre-existing charges. Monitoring and enforcing specialty compliance is an important part of post-extradition legal strategy.

The US is among the most active issuers of INTERPOL Red Notices — US-requested Red Notices cover financial crime, narcotics, terrorism, and cybercrime cases globally. A US-requested Red Notice creates provisional arrest risk in all INTERPOL member states, including countries with no formal extradition treaty with the US. Challenging a US-requested Red Notice through the CCF process is available where the notice violates INTERPOL’s rules — including cases where dual criminality fails, where the notice contains inaccurate information, or where the prosecution is politically motivated.

Contact our team for advice on US extradition and Interpol cases. See our guidance on CCF challenges and non-extradition countries.