Inequality in Love

746 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Loving v virginia essay

In June of 1967, a white man named Richard Loving and an African American woman named Mildred Jeter got married in Washington D.C. and then returned to the small town of Central Point, Virginia. After returning to Virginia, they were pulled out of bed at a nightly hour, tied, dragged and sentenced to a year in prison. On October 1958, a grand jury for the Circuit Court of Caroline County charged the Lovings for their interracial marriage because it went against state laws. In Section 257 of the Virginia Code it states that all marriages between a white person and a colored person is voided with no decree of divorce or other legal process ("Loving v. Virginia." LII). The Lovings and their lawyer, Bernard S. Cohen, then took their case to the Supreme Court who ruled unanimously 8 to 0 vote that the Virginia Code was unconstitutional because it went against the 14th Amendment (Covitz 165). In Loving v. Virginia, the Virginia law that prevented interracial marriage was overturned by the due process clause and equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
One of the main reasons for the Supreme Court’s ruling was the due process clause in the 14th Amendment. The right to marry has been considered one of the essential rights of a free man in the pursuit of happiness and what race he marries does not matter ("Loving v. Virginia 1967." Supreme 601-06). As Chief Justice Warren stated, “no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” ("Loving v. Virginia." LII). The United States’ Constitution allows right of marriage including the choice the individual has to choose a partner, and the state cannot interfere. To deny this basic freedom only because of race deprives all of the State's citizens ...

... middle of paper ...

...on Institute. Cornell University, n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2014.
"Loving v. Virginia (1967)." Civil Rights in the United States. Ed. Waldo E. Martin, Jr. and Patricia Sullivan. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2000. N. pag. U.S. History in Context. Web. 31 Mar. 2014.
"Loving v. Virginia 1967." Supreme Court Drama: Cases That Changed America. Ed. A. Walton Litz, Daniel E. Brannen, Jr., Elizabeth Shaw, and Richard Clay Hanes. Vol. 3: Affirmative Action/Assisted Suicide & the Right to Die/Civil Rights & Equal Protection/Gender Discrimination/Reproductive Rights/Rights of Immigrants, Gays, & the Disabled/Voting Rights. Detroit: UXL, 2001. 601-06. Gale Power Search. Web. 31 Mar. 2014.
"Loving v. Virginia." Law2.UniversityofMissouri-KansasCity. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Apr. 2014.
"Loving v. Virginia." LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University, n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2014.

Show More
Related

  • Supreme Court Case Romer v. Evans

    1494 Words  | 3 Pages

    The opinion of the court was held by Justice Kennedy, in that the Colorado amendment was held unconstitutional on the basis that it violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment on the United States Constitution. Kennedy argued the amendment singles out a specific group in which, it would make it so only homosexuals cannot receive the protective rights that are available to anyone else. This idea makes homosexuals unequal to everyone else because they are not guaranteed the same protection that anyone else could get if they needed it. Furthermore, the amendment burdens the homosexual community by not allowing them to seek protection against discrimination though the use of legislation. Additionally, Kennedy claims “In and ordinary case, a law will be sustained if it can be said to advance a legitimate government interest…” (632) By this he means that a law will be considered valid as long as it has a ...

    Read More

  • Griswold vs. Connecticut

    1819 Words  | 4 Pages

    Although marital privacy (and later personal privacy when Eisenstadt v. Baird, 1972, extended the rights to unmarried persons ), was at the heart of this ruling, there are many other compelling arguments in ruling this law unconstitutional. To examine these other points, including; freedom of speech/ press, right of association, privacy of the person, due process of law and the violation in restricting education, we must first have an basic understanding of the case itself.

    Read More

  • The Scottsboro Turning Point

    1180 Words  | 3 Pages

    Few things have impacted the United States throughout its history like the fight for racial equality. It has caused divisions between the American people, and many name it as the root of the Civil War. This issue also sparked the Civil Rights Movement, leading to advancements towards true equality among all Americans. When speaking of racial inequality and America’s struggle against it, people forget some of the key turning points in it’s history. Some of the more obvious ones are the Emancipation Proclamation, which freed slaves in the North, and Martin Luther King Jr.’s march on Washington D.C. in 1963. However, people fail to recount a prominent legal matter that paved the way for further strides towards equality.

    Read More

  • The Code of Ethics and the Principles of Professional Conduct of the Education Profession in Florida

    1526 Words  | 4 Pages

    Works Cited The "Civil Rights" Cornell University Law School, Inc. 2010. Web. The Web. The Web. 1 Apr. 2011.

    Read More

  • How the Civil Rights Movement Influenced the Women's Liberation Movement

    1779 Words  | 4 Pages

    Print. The. Lawson, Steven F., and Charles M. Payne. Debating the Civil Rights Movement, 1945-1968.

    Read More

  • The Fourteenth Amendment

    730 Words  | 2 Pages

    For some background, this case escalated to the Supreme Court since several groups of same-sex couples from different states, sued state agencies when their marriage was refused to be recognized. As it escalated through appeals, the plaintiffs argued that the states were violating the Equal Protection clause and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Equal Protection, according to the Constitution refers to the fact that, “any State [shall not] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” (23). The opposition of this case was that, 1) The Constitution does not address same-sex marriage as a policy, and 2) The sovereignty of states regarding the decision. Ultimately, and according to the Oyez project, the Court held that “[the Amendment] guarantees the right to marry as one of the fundamental liberties it protects, and that analysis applies to same-sex couples,” and therefore, same-sex marriage is a fundamental liberty.

    Read More

  • The Supreme Court and Civil Rights

    995 Words  | 2 Pages

    Smith, Robert C. "Supreme Court." Encyclopedia of African-American Politics. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2003. African-American History Online. Facts on File, Inc. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

    Read More

  • The Counterculture

    696 Words  | 2 Pages

    One of the most powerful counterculture movements in the sixties was the civil rights movement. In 1964, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act to end racial discrimination in employment, institutions like hospitals and schools, and privately owned public accommodations In 1965, congress returned suffrage to black southerners, by passing the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (Foner 926). In the case of Loving v. Virginia (1967), the Supreme Court ruled that laws prohibiting interracial marriage were unconstitutional (Foner 951). Because of the civil rights movement in the sixties, minorities gained more rights than they had prior to the 1960s.

    Read More

  • Essay On Des Moines Independent Community Schools

    579 Words  | 2 Pages

    Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.

    Read More

  • Loving v. Virginia

    1477 Words  | 3 Pages

    The idea of slavery gave some, not all, Caucasian Americans the idea that they were better than the blacks who worked for them. Mind sets like these set the ball in motion for anti-miscegenation laws. 41out of our 50 states had these laws at one time, leaving only 9 states without ever having an anti-miscegenation law. These states being: Alaska, Hawaii, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and New Jersey. 15 of these states abolished these laws only after the Loving V. Virginia case which was ruled on the 12th of June, 1967. That day, this couple got what they had wanted more than anything. They’re home back and their love to be a...

    Read More

  • Roe v. Wade 1973

    2148 Words  | 5 Pages

    Even to this day, women have not reached maximum equality, but the landmark Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade has helped the women’s equality movement drastically take a step in the right direction. Prior to the case, women had their rights very limited and restricted. Everyone was and still is entitled to their basic rights, however pregnant women were not. Their first, fourth, fifth, ninth, and fourteenth amendment rights were violated and were not addressed until Jane Roe testified in court. The decision made by the court still has a lasting impact even to this day. The landmark Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade was not just a win for Jane Roe, but a win for all women as it helped break the barrier that surrounded women’s equality.

    Read More

  • Loving v. Virginia (388 U.S. 1)

    2066 Words  | 5 Pages

    Mr. and Mrs. Loving were residents of the small town of Central point, Virginia. They were family friends who had dated each other since he was seventeen and she a teenager. When they learned that marriage was illegal for them in Virginia, they simply drove over the Washington, D.C. for the ceremony. They returned to Virginia and were arrested the following month for violating the anti-miscegenation statute, which was declared in the Racial Integrity Act of 1924. Commonwealth’s Attorney Bernard Mahon obtained the warrant for Richard Loving and “Mildred Jeter”. Mildred’s maiden name was on the warrant because in Virginia a marriage between a white and black was considered void. In October 1958, the indictments of Richard Loving and Mildred Jeter were bought before the court and on January 6, 1959, Richard and Mildred pled not guilty to the charges. Changing their pleas to guilty and waiving their right to a jury trial due to fear and optimism for a favorable punishment, the Lovings took the plea bargain. The Circuit Court judge that was presiding over the case, Judge Leon M. Bazile, did not see favor on them and sentenced them to one year in jail. Yet, at the same time in agreement with the plea bargain, Judge Bazile suspended the sentence for 25 years provided that the Lovings would leave the state of Virginia immediately and not return together for the whole period. There was a catch, for when the 25 year period ends they would still face the prosecution of the court if they ever returned. He concluded his decision with this quote:

    Read More

  • Nonviolent Protests: An argumentative essay

    1414 Words  | 3 Pages

    Marshall, Burke . "The Protest Movement and the Law." Virginia Law Review 51.5 (1965): 785-

    Read More

  • The Civil Rights Act of 1964

    1836 Words  | 4 Pages

    Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, segregation in the United States was commonly practiced in many of the Southern and Border States. This segregation while supposed to be separate but equal, was hardly that. Blacks in the South were discriminated against repeatedly while laws did nothing to protect their individual rights. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ridded the nation of this legal segregation and cleared a path towards equality and integration. The passage of this Act, while forever altering the relationship between blacks and whites, remains as one of history’s greatest political battles.

    Read More

  • Morality of Same Sex Marriage

    330 Words  | 1 Pages

    Furthermore, the word "equal" in section 1 of the 14th amendment implies that everyone should have the right to get married no matter what his or her sexual preference. Marriage is the legal and public documentation of the love and trust two people share for each other. This means that anyone should be able to marry whomever he or she wishes.

    Read More

More about Inequality in Love

Open Document