Reid v. Covert

Background

Counsel for Covert and Krueger asked the Court to rehear decisions about court-martial jurisdiction over civilians overseas. The Government and private lawyers participated in briefing. The Court granted the petition for rehearing and scheduled reargument, inviting new briefing on several specific questions about military trials of civilians.

Reasoning

The Court asked counsel to address four core topics: the practical government needs that might justify military trials of civilian dependents overseas; the historical evidence about the scope of the Constitution’s grant of power over the armed forces and how that interacts with other constitutional protections; whether civilians employed by the armed forces should be treated differently from civilian dependents; and whether major crimes should be treated differently from petty offenses. The order asks lawyers to bring historical and practical arguments to help the Justices decide how broad or narrow that military jurisdiction should be.

Real world impact

This action does not decide the merits but requires new argument on whether and when military courts can try civilians abroad. The topics the Court requested focus directly on civilian dependents and civilians employed by the armed forces and on distinctions between types of offenses. The case remains under active consideration and could lead to a future decision changing how civilians are tried overseas.

Dissents or concurrances

Three Justices—Reed, Burton, and Clark—would have denied rehearing, saying the issues (except the fourth question) were already fully presented; Justice Brennan took no part in the consideration.