## Facts

- Indiana law prohibited marriage between a white person and any person with one-eighth or more “negro blood.”
- On April 13, 1870, Thomas Gibson, alleged to have one-eighth or more “negro blood,” married Jennie Williams, identified as a white woman, in Indiana.
- The State indicted Gibson for unlawfully and knowingly entering the prohibited marriage.
- Gibson argued the Fourteenth Amendment and the federal Civil Rights Act rendered Indiana’s ban unconstitutional.
- The trial court quashed the indictment on constitutional grounds, and the State appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the Fourteenth Amendment invalidated Indiana’s statute barring marriage between white persons and persons with one-eighth or more “negro blood.”
2. Whether the federal Civil Rights Act preempted or abrogated Indiana’s authority to restrict marriage based on race.

## Decision

- The Indiana Supreme Court reversed the order quashing the indictment and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court held that neither the Fourteenth Amendment nor the Civil Rights Act abrogated Indiana’s prohibition on the marriage at issue.
- The court concluded the indictment was legally sufficient and the trial court should overrule the motion to quash and proceed to trial.

## Legal Principles

- Regulation of marriage and domestic relations is within a state’s reserved police power, absent controlling federal constitutional limitation.
- The Fourteenth Amendment, as construed by the court, extended constitutional protection to newly recognized citizens but did not transfer general authority over domestic-relations law from states to the federal government.
- Federal civil-rights legislation was construed not to dictate who may enter contracts, including marriage (treated as a civil contract), within a state’s jurisdiction.
- A reciprocal restriction on interracial marriage applying to both white persons and persons classified as Black was treated as not violating equal-protection guarantees under the court’s interpretation.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Indiana’s anti-miscegenation statute and reinstated the prosecution, reasoning that state authority to regulate marriage was not displaced by the Fourteenth Amendment or the Civil Rights Act as then understood.


State v. Gibson, 36 Ind. 389 (Ind. 1871)