In the case of Reid v. Covert, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1955 that American civilians abroad are protected by constitutional rights and cannot be tried by military tribunals, overturning a previous decision (Kinsella v. Krueger). The case involved Clarice Covert who had been convicted for murdering her husband at an airbase in England under court-martial proceedings as per Article 2(11) of Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which allowed such trials for dependents accompanying members of armed forces overseas. However, on appeal to the Supreme Court, it was held that this provision violated Fifth and Sixth Amendments' guarantees to indictment by grand jury and trial by jury respectively; thus declaring it unconstitutional when applied to civilian dependents irrespective of their location or circumstances surrounding their offense.

In the dissenting opinion for Reid v. Covert, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to extend constitutional protections to U.S. citizens abroad was misguided and overly broad. He contended that the Constitution did not necessarily apply in full force everywhere around the globe, especially on foreign soil or military bases where American law enforcement operated under different rules and constraints than within domestic borders. Furthermore, he believed that applying such rights universally could potentially interfere with America's ability to conduct foreign policy effectively and maintain order among its overseas personnel. In his view, it would be more appropriate for Congress to determine what legal protections should apply in these unique circumstances rather than having them dictated by judicial interpretation of the Constitution.