Interesting hypothesis: De Santis potential role in Trump indictment
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (79)
sorted by:
In a 1987 case, Puerto Rico v. Branstad,[3] the court overruled Dennison, and held that the governor of the asylum state has no discretion in performing his or her duty to extradite, whether that duty arises under the Extradition Clause of the Constitution or under the Extradition Act (18 U.S.C. § 3182), and that a federal court may enforce the governor's duty to return the fugitive to the demanding state.[4] There are only four grounds upon which the governor of the asylum state may deny another state's request for extradition:[5]
Interesting. GPT says: In your scenario, if you are charged with a minor crime in New York, and the governor of Florida refuses to extradite you, it is important to understand that the governor's refusal to extradite should be based on one of the four grounds established in the Puerto Rico v. Branstad decision. Otherwise, the refusal could be challenged in federal court.
If the Florida governor's refusal to extradite is valid under one of the four grounds, you would not be considered a fugitive in Florida. However, the charges in New York would still be outstanding. If you were to travel to New York or another state that agrees to extradite you to New York, you could still face arrest and prosecution for the charges.
And since Trump is not a fugitive, the fourth ground for denial of extradition would be valid.
For reference - 18 USC 921 defines fugitive as “any person who has fled from any State to avoid prosecution for a crime or avoid giving testimony in any criminal proceeding.” Since Trump is currently in Florida and will not have fled NY to avoid prosecution, he is not a fugitive. There may be an arrest warrant in another state for him, but that doesn’t mean he is arrested here nor is he a fugitive.