Analysis Of Loving V. Virginia

On July 11, 1958 a couple of hours after midnight, Richard Loving a white man and Mildred Loving an African American woman were awakened to the presence of three officers in their bedroom. One of the three officers demanded from Richard to identify the woman next to him. Mildred, full of fear, told the officers that she was his wife, while Richard pointed to the marriage license on the wall. The couple was then charged and later found guilty in violation of the state's anti-miscegenation statute.

The sheriff cruelly stated that the marriage certificate held no power in their district. Virginia’s law in fact  prevented black and white citizens from getting married out of the state and then returning to live within the state. Richard ended up spending only night in jail, while Mildred spent several more nights there while pregnant. The couple eventually pleaded guilty to breaking the Virginia law. The couple 's one-year sentences and charges would both be dropped, but only under one condition. Under the condition the couple was commanded to leave the state and not return together for 25 years. The Loving’s followed the orders. The couple paid their court fees and relocated to Washington, D.C. where they got married. When the couple relocated to Washington, D.C. they had three children named Donald, Sidney, and Peggy. Mildred and Richard occasionally made separate return visits to Virginia to see friends and family. Yet the two also secretly made trips to their home state together and eventually secretly lived in Virginia again with their kids despite the risk of detainment.

The United States Supreme Court was, and still is today, the important backbone of America’s judicial system. This court deals with numerous cases throughout the year and keeps the country and government fair with its decisions. However, being responsible for giving justice where it is due, the Court is sometimes faced with hard choices that will make a lasting impression on the U.S. and its people. In the case of Loving v. Virginia, it did just that. As a Supreme Court landmark case, Loving v. Virginia definitely indicated a critical moment of change in civil rights for America and interracial couples everywhere.

The Supreme Court case Loving v. Virginia (1967) resulted in the striking down of state laws that prohibited whites and African Americans from marrying. Mildred Loving, one of the parties in the case, issued a statement on the fortieth-anniversary of her case in which she urged that same-sex couples be allowed to marry.

Can you imagine not being able to share your life with the person you love because of the color of your skin? Well, this was the case for those who resided in Virginia decades ago. Interracial marriages were not allowed in Virginia and sixteen other states due to the adoption of the Racial Integrity Act of 1924. The sole purpose of this act was to completely prohibit a "white person" marrying other than another "white person". Marriage licenses were not issued until the issuing official is content with the applications statements as to if their races are "correct". Richard Loving, a white man, and Mildred Jeter, a black woman, was not going to let the state of Virginia stop them from being married, so they left

For years there have been forbidden love and marriage in the history of the United States, I decided to write a reflection on my thoughts views, fact findings and information regarding biracial marriages and segregation laws that were discriminatory in history. I read the short story about the Loving family and their pursuit to the Supreme Court in 1967, I thought of my own family history and realized that my paternal grandparents would’ve been prosecuted had they lived in Virginia or any other state that prohibited bi-racial marriages in the 1900s.

It is hard to believe that it has only been 48 years since the landmark 1967 Supreme Court case Loving v. Virginia, where the court unanimously declared Virginia 's Racial Integrity Act of 1924 unconstitutional and ended all race-based marriage bans in the U.S. When I chose this topic for my assignment, I don’t know if it was the lack of knowledge or denial that led me to believe it was longer than 48 years ago. To me, it felt like it was not a long time ago, and it was mindboggling because that meant that when my parents grew up, it was illegal if you wanted to have an interracial marriage, let alone relationship. That thought made me sad, because if I had grown up in that time, it would be illegal to be with my boyfriend now. I am in

Virginia case successfully outlawed legislation that prohibited members of different races to wed in holy matrimony, despite the fact that society’s view on interracial marriages remained intractable. In 1924, legislation was passed in Virginia that was designed to limit mixed-race relationships, called the Racial Integrity Act. Not only did it try to prevent intermixing, but it also produced two strict racial categories of “colored” and “white” that divided society even more. Richard and Mildred Loving, an interracial couple, fought to repeal that act in 1967 when they were both arrested for getting married, despite Virginia’s ban on marriages between blacks and whites. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the couple knew that they could not legally marry in their state of Virginia, so they went to Washington, D.C, and after “returning to their home state…the couple was charged with unlawful cohabitation and jailed” (ACLU). During the state court trial, the presiding judge, Leon Bazile found the couple to be guilty, justifying his ruling saying “[the] Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents...the fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.” After this ruling, Mildred felt compelled to write a letter to Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, asking for assistance fighting this state ruling. Soon, they were referred to the ACLU

Hodges, the Supreme Court adjudges the banning of same-sex marriage as violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court clearly establishes that marriage is a fundamental right because marriage is “decisions among the most intimate that an individual can make” (Obergefell v. Hodges, 12) and that individual autonomy should be protected under liberty. The Court also reasons that same-sex couples have the rights to enjoy intimate association that come with marriage. Because the Due Process Clause protects liberty of the citizens and rights to marriage is one of the fundamental liberties, prohibition of same-sex marriage violates the Due Process Clause. For Equal Protection Clause, the Court states that “same-sex couples are denied all the benefits afforded to opposite-sex couples and are barred from exercising a fundamental right” (Obergefell v. Hodges, 17). Because it is solely the sexual preference of the same-sex couples that deprives them of these benefits, the Court argues that the prohibition of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection

Virginia and the secret History of Race” was an article written by Brent Staples (2008) explaining the background and case of the Supreme Court case Loving v. Virginia.The case involved a interracial couple, Mildred and Richard Loving, that were being told that their marriage was not legal in the county they lived in. The loving had gotten married in Washington D.C. where they knew their marriage would be legal but once they moved back to their hometown in Caroline County Va, the true horrors of the south came known. The lovings were being shunned and discriminated against by the entire county because they were a black and white couple. The article then goes on to talk about the horrible reality of Jim Crow Laws and other discrimination the couple faced just for being

On June 2, 1958 Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving went to Washington D.C. to get married and they went back to Virginia a few days later. But because Mildred was of African-American and Native American decent, and Richard was white they were arrested for violating the state law that prohibits interracial marriage. At the time, Virginia was one of 17 states, including Texas and Alabama, that had laws prohibiting interracial marriage (Wolfe). The Supreme Court Case Loving v. Virginia is an important of part of American history that has had a huge impact on racial equality and has helped change the definition of marriage in the United States forever.

As a general rule, constitutional law examination differs depending on the nature of the right that is being asserted in a case. In the Constitution people have various rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. Other rights in the Constitution are not presented in the Constitution, but they are arguably stated within its context. In this paper I will agree that the Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges was right in affirming the equal rights of same-sex couples based on the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. The Court’s ruling in this case has an effect on the legal rights of children of same-sex couples, the rights of people who identify as gay, and the states’ sovereign right to enact legislation that defines

Loving versus Virginia is cased based on racial discrimination. A case is set in the 1950s where interracial marriages was still taboo. The state of Virginia had a law in place that made interracial marriages a felony. Which in turn Loving and his wife took their case to Supreme Court to seek justice for themselves and others, and their state’s law called into question. This case the Fourteenth Amendment was brought into play and the right to Equal Protection and Due Process clauses.

Virginia was another difficult case to solve for the Supreme Court. During this case, Virginia had released a series of laws making it illegal to marry other races; the penalties were grave. Once the people had looked over the details, they then realized that the laws punished everyone participating in it. The State argued that "because its miscegenation statutes punished both white and black participants in an interracial marriage equally, they cannot be said to constitute invidious discrimination based on race and, therefore, the statutes commanded mere rational basis review" (Loving vs. Virginia). This case had moved more people to support the civil rights movement due to the unfair treatment being

By deconstructing the common comparison of same-sex marriage to interracial marriage, she intends to defend her view that interracial marriage is not a slippery slope decision that will roll down hill in an out of control manner and head for the worst like, she claims, same-sex marriage will. Opposing Barber’s views, Quindlen wrote an essay in 2008 entitled: “The Loving Decision” where she sets forth her support for same-sex marriage by constructing a comparison between interracial marriage and same-sex marriage. She uses this comparison to suggest that same-sex marriage will, too, be validated by the courts because “the world only spins forward” (258). Even though Barber and Quindlen stand on opposite sides of the debate with views clashing on fundamental concepts like the meaning of marriage, the nature of homosexuality, and the applicability of the Loving v. Virginia court case to the issue, in various areas the two authors have common ground.