Issue: The issue rests in whether or not there is constitutional rights under the Equal Protection Act and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment for the State of Virginia to make it unlawful to marry solely on the basis of racial classifications.
Facts: Mildred Jeter, a black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, married in the District of Columbia in accommodation to its laws as of 1958. When returning to Virginia as married residents, Lovings was indicted for violations of interracial marriages. Upon a guilty plea, the two were sentenced to a year in jail that was suspended as long as they leave the state for twenty-five years. Questions of liberty and equality paved the way for this case.
Holding: The Supreme Court reversed the convictions under rights from the Equal Protection Act and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Reasons: The court found the laws of Virginia discriminatory of race. They reflected regulations regarding restrictions of marriage only outside the boundaries of whites. Therefore, these laws were seen as White Supremacy, unconstitutional, and in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The laws were also found in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process laws where Loving was denied liberty without due process of law, thus taking away one of his "basic civil rights of man," which is to marry on no other grounds besides racial discrimination. The State could not sanction these restrictions under the Constitution.
Prior to the 1967 United States Supreme Court case of Loving v. ... Before Loving v. ... The Loving v. ... Loving v. ... The case was brought by Mildred Loving, a black woman, and Richard loving, a white man, who had been sentenced to a year in prison in Virginia for marrying each other. ...
They cited the precedent of the 1967 United States Supreme Court's decision in Loving v. ... Court case acknowledged as (Jones v. Hallahan [1973]) and Washington State by a gay male couple (Singer v. ... Loving vs. ... Virginia had a public policy that was personified in the said statute (Li 2012) . ...
A recent state court decision, which accurately illustrates the weaknesses in current domestic relations law regarding the definition of "parent", is Allison D. v. Virginia M. (96). Allison and Virginia were in a committed lesbian relationship and began living together in 1978. ... Virginia was artificially inseminated by semen of an unknown donor. In 1981, Virginia gave birth to a son named A.D.M to include the surnames of both women. ...
Does the equal protection clause in the fourteenth amendment guarantee same-sex couples the right to marry? If same-sex marriage were to be federally legalized would the sturdy backbone of our culture be broken? Is it not morally wrong to deny the citizens of the United States of America the basic human right to marry? Is it governments place to define marriage and love? The United States of America is desperately striving to answer these intense questions but it seems that everyone has a different opinion on what is moral and what is lawful. ...
The Governor of Virginia at the time, William Berkley, had pacified local Native Americans. ... Since the indentured servants could not migrate towards the Chesapeake part of Virginia because of the tidewater aristocrats residing there, they had no choice but to move westward to the backcountry of Virginia. ... He wrote, "lt is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. " Marbury v. ... The controversial topic of marriage between interracial couples in the 1960s was deemed constitutional until the case of Loving vs. Virginia in 1967, which decla...
On the other hand, the Supreme Court contends in 'Loving V. Virginia' that marriage is "one of the basic civil rights of man" (US Supreme Court, Loving v. Virginia, law.cornell.edu, June 12, 1967, Sept 16th 2014.) ... A lot of good, decent, caring and loving people are being harmed in this game of wait and see. ... This decision was made in relation to the fact that the state of Virginia's US 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the ban of gay marriage was unconstitutional, (Amanda Lamb "NC to stop defending marriage amendment" www.wral.com, July 2014, Sept 1...
Lawrence v. Texas Our basic freedoms afforded to us by the Constitution have been stripped away from some individuals because of their sexual preferences. The "fundamental rights- argument tracks a line of contraception and abortion cases, holding that certain intimate, private, family-related cho...
In Baehr v. ... It's dominance is obvious in many official records, such as that of Singer v. ... The 9th Amendment states, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" In Loving v. Virginia, Justice Warren of the U.S. ... One such example is the ruling in Zablocki v. ...
