Ex Parte Siebold

The convicted judges were duly sentenced to prison--but they protested. In their petition for habeas corpus (a claim that they had been or were about to be wrongfully imprisoned), they made three arguments:

(1) When Congress regulates elections, that power is an exclusive power.

(2) Being exclusive, Congress's regulatory power cannot be interfered with by the states. Therefore, it "must be so exercised as not to interfere with or come in collision with regulations presented . . . by the States, unless it provides for the complete control over [elections]."

(3) When Congress runs an election, its regulations "must take the place of all state regulations . . . [and the election] must be entirely and completely controlled and provided for by Congress.

Clearly, behind the legal language of Ex parte Siebold was a political fight. The federal government was involved in supervising congressional elections because of the civil rights legislation that Congress had passed in 1870 and 1871. At that point, federal troops were still stationed throughout the South, to prevent the resumption of power by former Confederate officials and to guarantee the civil rights of African Americans. The legislation calling for deputy marshals and federal officials was another layer of political control--a layer deeply resented by many white people in the South.

By the time of Siebold, 1880, federal troops had been out of the South for some seven years. But the civil rights legislation was still in place--and many white Southerners, including many residents of Maryland, deeply resented the idea of sharing political power with their black neighbors. Thus, like Siebold and his colleagues, they resorted to various forms of election fraud. And, like the men in Ex parte Siebold, they resisted federal control in whatever ways they could.