Rocca v. Thompson, 1911, is a U.S Supreme Court case that revolved around the issue of citizenship and naturalization laws. The petitioner, Rocca, was born in Italy but moved to California as an infant with his parents who later became naturalized U.S citizens. As an adult living abroad in Italy again for many years, he sought protection from the American consulate during a local disturbance on the basis of being a US citizen through his parent's naturalization while he was still minor. However, this claim was denied by Thompson (the consul), leading to legal proceedings. The court ruled in favor of Rocca stating that under existing laws at that time; children of foreign-born parents who become naturalized citizens while their children are minors automatically gain citizenship themselves without needing individual applications or declarations once they reach adulthood. Therefore it held that Rocca did not lose his acquired American citizenship despite residing long-term outside America and should have been granted consular protection.

In the dissenting opinion for Rocca v. Thompson, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. argued that the majority's decision was based on a misinterpretation of international law and an overextension of U.S jurisdiction. He contended that the court had no authority to interfere in matters concerning foreign vessels in transit unless there were clear violations of American laws or interests at stake, which he believed wasn't evident in this case. The justice also expressed concerns about potential diplomatic repercussions from such interference with foreign affairs without sufficient justification under international law principles.