In Thompson v. United States (1894), the Supreme Court ruled that a person cannot be tried for a crime committed on foreign soil, even if they are brought back to the U.S. The case involved John L. Thompson, an American citizen who was charged with murder after killing another American in Peru while serving as captain of an American ship. He was arrested upon his return to New York and indicted under federal law which stated that crimes committed by Americans abroad could be prosecuted in any district where the offender is found or brought into after committing such offense outside of America's jurisdiction. However, Justice Gray delivered the opinion of the court stating that this statute did not apply because it only covered offenses against other laws regulating commerce at sea and not general criminal statutes like those prohibiting murder. Therefore, he concluded that Congress had no power to punish crimes committed outside its territorial limits except when authorized by treaty or protected by international law; hence Thompson’s indictment must be dismissed.

In the dissenting opinion for Thompson v. United States, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained from an illegal search and seizure was fundamentally flawed. He contended that this ruling violated the Fourth Amendment rights of citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement officials. In his view, any evidence gathered through such means should be considered inadmissible in court as it is tainted by its unlawful procurement. Furthermore, he believed that allowing such practices would set a dangerous precedent where police could violate individuals' constitutional rights with impunity if they were able to secure incriminating evidence as a result. This interpretation of the Constitution would undermine civil liberties and erode public trust in law enforcement agencies.