Reid v. Covert

SCOTUSCase
Litigants=Reid v. Covert
ArgueDate=May 3
ArgueYear=1956
ReargueDate=February 27
ReargueYear=1957
DecideDate=June 10
DecideYear=1957
FullName=Reid, Superintendent, District of Columbia Jail v. Clarice Covert
USVol=354
USPage=1
Citation=77 S. Ct. 1222; 1 L. Ed. 2d 1148; 1957 U.S. LEXIS 729
Prior=
Subsequent=
Holding=The Constitution supersedes all treaties ratified by the United States Senate. The military may not try the civilian wife of a soldier under military jurisdiction.
SCOTUS=1957-1958
Plurality=Black
JoinPlurality=Warren, Douglas, Brennan
Concurrence=Frankfurter
Concurrence2=Harlan
Dissent=Clark
JoinDissent=Burton
NotParticipating=Whittaker
LawsApplied=U.S. Const. Art. VI

"Reid v. Covert", 354 U.S. 1 (1957), is a landmark case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate. According to the decision, "this Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty," although the case itself was with regard to an executive agreement and the treaty has never been ruled unconstitutional.

The case involved Mrs. Covert, who had been convicted by a military tribunal of murdering her husband. At the time of Mrs. Covert's alleged offense, an executive agreement was in effect between the United States and United Kingdom which permitted United States' military courts to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over offenses committed in Great Britain by American servicemen or their dependents. The Court found that "no agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or on any other branch of Government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution." The Court's core holding of the case is that civilian wives of soldiers may not be tried under military jurisdiction, because the Fifth Amendment's grant for military jurisdiction, i.e. "except in cases arising in the land and naval forces" cannot sweep in the jury-trial requirement reflected in the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.

Justice Harlan's concurrence was premised on the idea that the Constitution applies overseas, unless its application was "impracticable and anomalous." In Reid, Harlan concurred with the opinion because he found that providing Fifth Amendment rights extra-territorially was in fact, impracticable and anomalous.

The case made Ms. Covert's lawyer, Frederick Bernays Wiener, famous in legal history; the case represents the only time a lawyer lost in the Supreme Court of the United States but prevailed on rehearing.

ee also

*List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 354

References

* [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=354&page=1 Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957)] .