Despite submitting a laundry list of Reservations, Understandings, and Declarations alongside ratification of the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), the United States was a strong proponent of the CAT and an advocate for the importance of the “extradite or prosecute” provision of the CAT. In the twenty-five years since U.S. ratification of the CAT and codification of the provision that allows for prosecutions of extraterritorial acts of torture, the “Torture Act” has resulted in only two viable prosecutions and one extradition. This paper examines the apparent underutilization of this statute and whether actions taken against the many other perpetrators of extraterritorial torture found on U.S. soil since its enactment were in compliance with the CAT.