In the case of Madsen v. Kinsella, Warden in 1951, the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a military court had jurisdiction over civilian dependents of service members stationed overseas during peacetime. The petitioner, Mrs. Clarice Covert (under pseudonym Dorothy Krueger Smith and later Doris Madsen), was convicted by a United States military tribunal in England for murdering her husband who was an Air Force sergeant at an airbase there. The Supreme Court initially upheld her conviction on appeal but agreed to rehear the case after criticism from civil liberties groups and legal scholars about its implications for constitutional rights of civilians abroad under American control. Upon reconsideration, it reversed its decision with six justices agreeing that Mrs. Covert could not be tried by a military court because she remained protected by the Constitution even while living overseas as a dependent of serviceman during peacetime; thus ruling that courts-martial lacked jurisdiction over civilian dependents accompanying members of the armed forces overseas in times when no war has been declared.

In the dissenting opinion for Madsen v. Kinsella, Justice Jackson argued that military tribunals should not have jurisdiction over civilians in peacetime or wartime unless martial law has been declared. He contended that the majority's decision to uphold Mrs. Madsen's conviction by a military tribunal during World War II was an unwarranted extension of military authority into civilian life and a violation of her constitutional rights. Jackson emphasized that under U.S constitution, civilians are entitled to trial by jury except under conditions of martial law where civil courts cannot function effectively due to war or public danger; neither condition existed in this case as Mrs.Madsen was tried after WWII had ended and civil courts were functioning normally in Germany at the time of her trial.