In the case of Secretary of the Navy v. Avrech, 1973, Robert Avrech, a naval officer and doctor who was drafted during the Vietnam War era under a law that allowed for compulsory service from medical personnel, sought to challenge his deployment orders on grounds that they were issued in retaliation for his anti-war activities. The Supreme Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear Avrech's claim because he had failed to exhaust all available military remedies before seeking relief in civilian court. This ruling reinforced the principle of "exhaustion," which requires individuals subject to military authority to first use all possible avenues within the military justice system before turning to civilian courts for redress.

In the dissenting opinion for Secretary of the Navy v. Avrech, Justice Douglas argued that a writ of habeas corpus should have been issued by the lower courts to examine whether Lieutenant Avrech's religious beliefs were sincere and if they justified his conscientious objector status. He contended that it was not enough for military authorities to simply state their disbelief in Avrech's sincerity without providing substantial evidence or reasoning behind this decision. Furthermore, he criticized the majority opinion for allowing such an important issue regarding individual rights and freedoms to be decided solely within military jurisdiction without judicial review. This, according to him, undermined civilian control over military matters which is fundamental in a democratic society.