Ex Parte Yarbrough
"Ex Parte Yarbrough," commonly referred to as the Ku Klux Klan case, is a significant legal decision stemming from the late 19th century regarding voting rights and racial discrimination in the United States. The case involved Jasper Yarbrough and other Klansmen who were convicted in federal court for violently preventing an African American man, Berry Saunders, from exercising his right to vote in a federal election. In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the convictions, emphasizing that the Fifteenth Amendment protects citizens from being barred from voting based on race. Justice Samuel F. Miller's interpretation of the amendment reinforced the idea that federal protections against racial discrimination in voting were paramount.
However, this precedent faced a challenge in subsequent cases, such as James v. Bowman (1903), where the Court ruled that congressional enforcement of the Fifteenth Amendment was only applicable to state actions, thereby limiting the federal government's ability to address private discrimination. The case of Ex Parte Yarbrough illustrates the complexities of civil rights protections during a period of intense racial strife and highlights the evolving legal landscape surrounding voting rights in the United States. Understanding this case provides insight into the historical context of racial discrimination and the ongoing struggle for voting rights.
Ex Parte Yarbrough
Date: March 3, 1884
Citation: 110 U.S. 651
Issues: Right to vote; private discrimination
Significance: This 1884 decision is the only nineteenth century case in which the Supreme Court allowed the federal government to enforce the Fifteenth Amendment by punishing private individuals for obstructing a citizen’s right to vote.
In Ex parte Yarbrough, also known as the Ku Klux Klan case, Jasper Yarbrough and his fellow Klansmen were convicted in federal court of using violence against an African American, Berry Saunders, to prevent him from voting in a federal election. The Supreme Court unanimously upheld the conviction. Justice Samuel F. Miller broadly interpreted the Fifteenth Amendment as a guarantee that a citizen must not be prevented from voting in federal elections because of his race. In James v. Bowman (1903), however, the Court ignored Yarbrough and held that congressional enforcement of the Fifteenth Amendment was limited to state action.
