jan 1, 1967 - Loving v. Virginia

Description:

Overview: This 1958 Supreme Court Case was a deciding case in striking down racist antimiscegenation law of the South. Thc case revolved around the legality of the imprisonment of a married couple for being different races.

Biography:
Richard Loving and Mildred Jeter-
Richard, a white construction worker, and Mildred, a woman of mixed African American and Native American ancestry, were longtime friends who had fallen in love. In June 1958, they exchanged wedding vows in Washington, D.C. After the court the initial ruling, the couple were forced to leave Virginia and relocate to Washington, D.C. the couple had three children—sons Sidney and Donald and a daughter, Peggy—but they longed to return to their hometown. In 1963 Mildred Loving wrote a letter to U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy asking for assistance. Kennedy referred the Lovings to the American Civil Liberties Union, which agreed to take their case.

Facts: In 1958, two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, a black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, were married in the District of Columbia. When the two returned to their home State of Virginia, the couple was charged with violating the state’s antimiscegenation statute, which banned inter-racial marriage. The Lovings were found guilty and sentenced to a year in jail. The lovings were given the choice to have the sentence suspended if they would leave Viginia and not return for 25 years.

Issue: Did Viginia’s antimiscegenation law violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Holding: Unanimous Decision for Loving

Ratinale: The Court held that alienations according to race were “odious to a free people” and were subject to “the mos rigid scrutiny” under the Equal Protection Clause. The Virginia law was declared to have no legitimate purpose “independent of invidious racial discrimination.” The law also violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Chief Justice Earl Warren declared, “Under out Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State.”

Tangential Cases:
Pace v. Alabama (1883) – The first recorded interracial sex case in America and one in which the United States Supreme Court affirmed the Alabama’s anti-miscegenation statue was constitutional. The plaintiff, Tony Pace, an African-American man, and Mary Cox, a white woman, were residents of the state of Alabama, who had been arrested in 1881 because their sexual relationship violated the state's anti-miscegenation statute. They were charged with living together "in a state of adultery or fornication" and both sentenced to two years imprisonment in the state penitentiary in 1882.

McLaughlin v. Florida (1964) - a case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a cohabitation law of Florida, part of the state's anti-miscegenation laws, was unconstitutional. Dewey McLaughlin, a Miami Beach hotel porter originally from Honduras, and Connie Hoffman, a Caucasian waitress, were an unmarried couple living together and were given a sentence of thirty days in the county jail, and a fine of $150 for each defendant. The decision overturned Pace v. Alabama.

Kinney v. Commonwealth (1878) - Supreme Court of Virginia ruled that the marriage legalized in Washington, D.C. between Andrew Kinney, a black man, and Mahala Miller, a white woman, was "invalid" in Virginia.

Kirby v. Kirby (1921) – Mr. Kirby asked the state of Arizona for an annulment of his marriage. He charged that his marriage was invalid because his wife was of "negro" descent, thus violating the state's anti-miscegenation law. The Arizona Supreme Court judged Mrs. Kirby's race by observing her physical characteristics and determined that she was of mixed race, therefore granting Mr. Kirby's annulment.

Perez v. Sharp (1948) - the Supreme Court of California recognized that bans on interracial marriage violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution.

Links to External Sources
Oyez
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1966/395
History.com
https://www.history.com/topics/civil-rights-movement/loving-v-virginia
Legal Information Institute
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/388/1

Added to timeline:

Date:

Images:

YouTube: