## Facts

- Edward M. Yerger, a civilian and former Confederate newspaper editor, killed Major Joseph G. Crane in Jackson, Mississippi.
- Federal military authorities arrested Yerger and ordered him tried by a military commission under Reconstruction governance rather than in Mississippi civil courts.
- Yerger sought habeas corpus in federal circuit court, arguing the detention and military commission’s jurisdiction were unlawful.
- The circuit court denied relief and remanded Yerger to military custody.
- Yerger then sought Supreme Court review through writs of habeas corpus and certiorari, after Congress had repealed a statutory habeas appeal provision enacted in 1867.

## Issues

1. Whether the Supreme Court retained appellate jurisdiction to review, via habeas corpus aided by certiorari, a circuit court order remanding a prisoner, despite Congress’s 1868 repeal of the 1867 Act’s habeas appeal provision.
2. Whether the 1868 repeal eliminated only the specific appeal mechanism created in 1867, or also extinguished other sources of Supreme Court habeas jurisdiction grounded in earlier statutes and the Constitution.
3. Whether the Supreme Court could direct habeas process to a federal military officer holding a civilian for trial before a military commission.

## Decision

- The Court unanimously held it had appellate habeas jurisdiction to review a circuit court’s remand order by habeas corpus aided by certiorari.
- The Court held the 1868 repeal removed only the appeal route created by the 1867 Act and did not affect habeas jurisdiction arising under the Constitution and pre-1867 statutes, including the Judiciary Act of 1789.
- The Court recognized its authority to direct the writ to a military officer holding the petitioner.
- The Court resolved the jurisdictional questions and did not reach a final merits determination on the legality of the military commission proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- When a federal circuit court brings a prisoner before it on habeas, inquires into the cause of detention, and remands the prisoner, the Supreme Court may exercise appellate review of that decision by habeas corpus aided by certiorari.
- A statute repealing a particular appellate path to Supreme Court review in habeas does not, without clear language, eliminate other independent bases for habeas jurisdiction conferred by the Constitution and earlier Acts of Congress.
- The Supreme Court’s habeas process may run to federal officers, including military custodians, where the detention is asserted under color of federal authority.
- Jurisdiction-stripping measures are construed to the extent of their terms; withdrawal of one statutory channel does not imply withdrawal of all habeas review mechanisms.

## Conclusion

The Court held that Congress’s 1868 repeal of the 1867 Act’s habeas appeal provision did not terminate the Supreme Court’s preexisting appellate authority to review circuit court habeas remand orders through habeas corpus and certiorari, preserving an alternative route for federal judicial review of detentions, including those carried out by military officers.


Ex parte Yerger, 75 U.S. (8 Wall.) 85 (1869)