Between 1889 and 1931 nearly 3,000 blacks were lynched in the American South. One of the few “theory driven” efforts to explain the lynching phenomenon has employed Blalock's “power threat hypothesis” as a framework, arguing that southern whites lynched blacks to retain political hegemony. This paper reexamines the empirical support for a power threat interpretation of southern lynchings and finds it wanting. It is shown that previous analyses have been plagued by a variety of conceptual and methodological weaknesses including: sensitivity to extremely influential cases; sample selection truncation; an inappropriate measure of lynching; and possible model misspecification. Our alternative analyses, including corrections for these problems, reveal no support for the power threat explanation for lynching.