Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Extradition Clause

Read a random definition: control-your-kid law

A quick definition of Extradition Clause:

Extradition Clause: The Extradition Clause is a part of the United States Constitution that says if someone commits a crime in one state and then runs away to another state, the state where the crime was committed can ask the other state to send the person back to face trial. This means that people can't just run away to avoid getting in trouble for breaking the law.

A more thorough explanation:

The Extradition Clause is a provision in the United States Constitution that requires any person accused of a crime who flees to another state to be returned to the state where the crime was committed upon request of the executive authority of that state. This clause is found in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution.

If a person commits a crime in California and then flees to Nevada, the California governor can request that the Nevada governor extradite the accused back to California to face charges. The Extradition Clause ensures that criminals cannot escape justice by simply crossing state lines.

Another example would be if a person commits a crime in New York and then flees to Florida. The New York governor can request that the Florida governor extradite the accused back to New York to face charges.

These examples illustrate how the Extradition Clause works to ensure that criminals cannot evade justice by fleeing to another state. It allows for cooperation between states in the pursuit of justice and upholding the law.

extra curtem domini | extradition treaty

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
16:04
yeah but Schrödinger wasn't really complaining
Mostlylegal
16:04
okay well imagine schrodinger really wants to hang out with his cat, then answer my question
16:06
ya I'd still wanna hear if if the he'd prefer the uncertainty over knowing it died
Mostlylegal
16:07
either way he doesnt get to play with his cat
16:08
yeah true
But the non-observable quantum state of uncertainty implies that both possibilities are simultaneously true
So you have been Accepted and Denied
Use that uno-reverse on them
16:09
logical determinism says otherwise
16:10
but you know that already with your username
16:11
Schrodinger's Application
Mostlylegal
16:13
you should send adcoms a thank you for the admission and also a request for why they rejected you to coincide with your dichotomic understanding of possibilities then
16:15
weirdest thing just happened to me
16:16
i went to hofstra admitted student day and they booked hotel rooms for us and I didn't go to the hotel cuz I had a long drive and wanted to avoid Monday traffic
16:17
and someone from admission's just called me to ask why I didn't go and was like well we still had to pay for you
Let’s assume A(acceptance), R(rejection), D(decision). Although, according to logical determinism, the future event D may have a set truth value of A^R, the function of ^(or) allows for uncertainty because the truth value of a future event D being fixed as A^R (true or false) is just to say ~(~A^~R)—otherwise put as logical determinism can eat me
16:17
i was just like i'm sorry! i wasn't feeling well and she seemed pissed
16:18
weird vibe
Mostlylegal
16:28
@CaliforniaPhilosopher: your translation from language to logic was close, the inclusion of the word "May" actually throws it off. it would actually be best expressed A^R>D. Logical determinism would put the true or false principle in this case on D rather than R or A. A similar confusion would be since A>~R would be ~A>R. this isnt logical since A and R or not the only inputs
Mostlylegal
16:29
fo thirty pm is dedicated to University of Florida inviting me to another information session
Law-Shark
16:31
@nattyalley: Honestly, that's incredibly unprofessional what you did. I would be pissed too. If you can't see why that is, you should not be going to law school at this time.
MrThickRopes
16:31
fo pm ain't shit
MrThickRopes
16:31
@Law-Shark: oooooo what's da teaaa
Law-Shark
16:31
Just read that story. That's so disconnected from how functioning adults operate, it blows my mind.
MrThickRopes
16:31
ohhhhhh
MrThickRopes
16:31
damnnnnnnnn nattyalley thas on you fo sure
Florida too busy celebrating a national championship
Mostlylegal
16:32
had them on my bracket easy money
MrThickRopes
16:33
they splurgin out dem rs nd wls at smu but i din get none
16:38
@Law-Shark: they didn't say we had to go? and if they are willing to buy rooms for a bunch of people. they sent me a res because I was over 50 miles away but I didn't even ask for one
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.