In Re Thomas Kaine was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court in 1852. The issue at hand was whether or not Thomas Kaine, an alleged fugitive from Great Britain, could be extradited to face criminal charges there. In its ruling, the court held that extradition of fugitives is governed by treaty and must be done according to the terms of such treaties between nations. Furthermore, it found that any attempt to extradite someone without following these procedures would violate both international law and U.S. laws protecting citizens' rights against unlawful arrest and detention. As a result of this decision, foreign governments are now required to follow certain protocols when seeking extradition from the United States for their own nationals who have fled abroad after committing crimes in their home countries

In In re Thomas Kaine, an Alleged Fugitive from Great Britain, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a writ of habeas corpus should be issued in order for Kaine to be released from custody. The majority opinion held that since he had been arrested by a foreign government and not the United States, no writ of habeas corpus could issue. However, Justice McLean dissented on this point and argued that it would have been possible for the court to issue such a writ if they found sufficient cause. He noted that while Congress had passed laws prohibiting interference with extradition proceedings between two countries, these laws did not apply when there were questions about jurisdiction or other legal issues involved in the case at hand. Furthermore, he argued that even if Congress had intended those laws to prevent any judicial review whatsoever of extradition cases involving foreign governments then this would violate fundamental principles of justice which are inherent in our system of government.