Preview

Loving v. Virginia Summary

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
290 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Loving v. Virginia Summary
CRIJ 1310-01: Fundamentals of Criminal Law
February 14, 2014
Loving V. Virginia The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Loving v. Virginia on June 12, 1967 struck down the remaining interracial marriage bans in 16 states in the United States, ending race discrimination in marriage. The state of Virginia enacted laws making it a felony for a white person to intermarry with a black person or the reverse. The constitutionality of the statutes was called into question. Restricting the freedom to marry solely on the basis of race violates the central meaning of the Equal Protection Clause. The Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia held that the statutes served the legitimate state purpose of preserving the racial integrity of its citizens. The State then argued that because its miscegenation statutes punished both white and black participants in an interracial marriage equally, they cannot be said to discriminate based on race, therefore requiring that the statutes needed further review.
The statutes were clearly drawn upon race-based distinctions because the legality of certain behavior turned on the races of the people engaging in it. Equal Protection requires that classifications based on race be subject to intense scrutiny for this reason. The Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution prohibits classifications drawn by any statute that constitutes subjective and hateful discrimination. The fact that Virginia would focus on bans of interracial marriages involving whites is proof that the miscegenation statutes exist for no other purpose other than the independent goals of those based on racial discrimination. This case was essential in providing a firm foundation, that it is not possible, for a state law to be valid, which makes the criminality of an act depend upon the race of the actor.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    In 1963, the Lovings filed a motion in State Trail court on the grounds on Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment were violated.…

    • 109 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In order for a facially-neutral law to be struck down as unconstitutional under the equal protection clause, one must prove that there is a discriminatory impact as well as discriminatory purpose or discriminatory administration (Chemerinsky 724). Tick Wo v. Hopkins is an example of a case that lacked discriminatory intent in the context of the law, however was carried out in a discriminatory manner. In Tick the law was racially neutral, but its administration to Chinese-Americans was discriminatory in nature as the facts established that Chinese-Americans were often denied for permits than non-Chinese-Americans (Alexander…

    • 95 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Mildred Jeter, an African-American woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, went to Washington, D.C, to get married and avoid Virginia’s interracial marriage ban. When they returned to Virginia not long after, the Lovings were arrested under the charges of violating Virginia’s interracial marriage ban.…

    • 189 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Loving v Virginia a married couple from Washington D.C. moved to Virginia where they were then subject to Virginia’s anti-miscegenation statute. Anti-miscegenation laws prohibit the marrying of different races with another. In Virginia, this statute prohibited the marriage between whites and any other race. Richard Loving, a white man, and Mildred Jeter, a black woman, were married in Washington D.C. They then moved to the state of Virginia where they faced criminal charges. Both of them pled guilty and were sentenced to one year imprisonment but the sentence would be waved for 25 years if they moved out of state and didn’t return.…

    • 600 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Apush Chapter 17 Terms

    • 712 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Also issues on Constitutionality- court declared this act as unconstitutional, holding that the fourteenth amendment gave congress the power to outlaw discrimination by states, but not by private individuals.…

    • 712 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Stutzman Case Summary

    • 433 Words
    • 2 Pages

    “This case is about crushing dissent. In a free America, people with differing beliefs must have room to coexist,” ADF’s senior counsel Kristen Waggoner said in a statement. “It’s wrong for the state to force any citizen to support a particular view about marriage or anything else against their will. Freedom of speech and religion aren’t subject to the whim of a majority; they are constitutional guarantees.”…

    • 433 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    ISSUE: State statues definition of “marriage” -limiting it to man & woman. Unconstitutional as it bars equal protection…

    • 1076 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Lovings were represented by American Civil Liberties Union and had the conviction appealed. The Supreme Court ruled that their rights to equal protection and due process under the Fourteenth Amendment was violated. The Racial Integrity law was stroke down. The Supreme Court recognized that this law was meant to keep all others segregated from Caucasians.…

    • 564 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    There was also the case of Pace v. Alabama which allowed Alabama to outlaw interracial sex and marriage. Justice’s decided Plessy’s case did not conflict with the thirteen amendment, although the fourteen amendment which was violated, was decided that seperation of races did not violate the 14th amendment since states had the right to regulate railroad companies that run only in the state, according to the supreme court also stated that Plessy was not being treated as a slave or unequal, and that seperation did not violate 14th or 15th amendments. Since this decision was made and with the influence of past cases that did not support the Plessy v. Ferguson case,a legal culture among citizens and law officials was created in which it was believed that it was okay to have separate facilities. The concept of internal legal culture judges from state and supreme court and lawyers!!!!. internal legal culture, the citizens believed that it was fine if there was…

    • 1266 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    virginia v morre

    • 1241 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The day was February 20,2003, in the city of Portsmouth where two Portsmouth police officers had pulled a vehicle over who was driven by David Lee Moore. While listening to police radio they had heard that the man they pulled over who went by the nickname “chubs” was driving on a suspended license. The officer’s soon determined that chubbs was indeed driving on a suspended license. The officers who made the stop arrested chubbs for the misdemeanor of driving on a suspended license. This violation could have lead to chubbs serving a 1-year in jail and a $25,000 fine, according to Va Code Ann 18.2-11. The officers then searched the vehicle in which chubbs was driving. During the search of the vehicle the officers found 16 grams of crack cocaine and $516 in cash. The state law of Virginia states that the officers should have offered Moore a summons rather than arresting him. The statutes of the Fourth Amendment give the officers the right to search if they believe a crime was committed in their presence. The act of driving on a suspended license is not an offense you can be arrested for unlike other misdemeanors.…

    • 1241 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Jim Crow Laws is a list of laws that were used in previous years in different parts of the United States of America. The law above was from the state of Georgia and it forbid marriage between races. Similar laws existed in Maycomb, Alabama in the 1930s. White and black folks were separated in courtrooms, churches, and were not allowed to marry. Those who married and had mixed children were often seen as “in betweens” (Lee, 1960).…

    • 319 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The United States v. Virginia court case was debated on Jan 17, 1996 at Virginia Military Institute. The advocates involved were Paul Bender, who argued the case for the United States and Theodore B. Olson, who argued the case on behalf of Virginia. The U.S was the petitioner, while Virginia was the accused. According to "FindLaw's United States Supreme Court Case and Opinions.” the case was about Virginia Military Institute violating the fourteenth Amendments of Equal Protection by maintaining a public founded Virginia Military Institute as an all-male institution. According to "United States v. Virginia 518 U.S. 515 (1996)." Justia Law, the intention of the VMI was to create “citizen soldiers”, men who are prepared for leadership in civilian life and in military service. The VMI was trying to train male leaders of the future excluding the females.…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Plaintiffs in Loving v. Virginia were Richard and Mildred Loving, who were represented by the ACLU in the Supreme Court. The Plaintiff argued the prohibition of interracial marriage was unconstitutional and anti-miscegenation laws violated the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment explains, “No State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of the law.” As declared by the Constitution and Maynard v. Hill case, marriage is a civil right for citizens of the United States and the decision of whether one decides to marry a colored person or not cannot be infringed by any state. Denying anyone their given right to marry without due process of the…

    • 274 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Pa250 Unit 1

    • 783 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Loving v. Virginia (388 US 1, 1967) was a landmark case, dealing with inter-racial marriage, which went all the way to the US Supreme Court. The plaintiffs, Mildred and Richard Loving, an inter-racial couple, who were residents of Virginia, where at the time it was illegal for people of different races to be married. They went to Washington D.C. in June of 1958 to get married, and returned back to live a married couple in Virginia. Upon their return to Caroline County, Virginia they were charged with violating the law. The couple was charged when police invaded their home in the middle of the night, hoping to witness the Loving’s involved in a sexual act which was also a crime at the time in Virginia. When Mrs. Loving showed the police the marriage certificate, the police charged the couple with violating Virginia § 20-50 which, “prohibited interracial couples from being married out of state and then returning to Virginia.” As well as, Virginia § 20-59 that made “miscegenation” a felony. Black’s Law defines miscegenation as, “A marriage between persons of different races, formally considered illegal in some jurisdictions. In 1967, the US Supreme Court held that laws banning…

    • 783 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Loving Vs Virginia Essay

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The judge of the Loving’s trial stated “Almighty God created the races white, black, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. and but for the interference with his arrangement, there would be no cause for such marriage. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.” The state of Virginia, the plaintiff, makes the argument that couples of different race should not be married for it’s not what God intended. On the other side, the defendant, the Loving’s, believe the state didn’t have the right to charge them and the state was…

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays