FC: Loving v Virginia | By: Morgan Mescan & Jamie Chambon
1: Table Of Contents | Background Information ... 2 Lower Courts ... 8 Judicial Questions ... 12 Outcome ... 14 Aftermath ... 20
2: Background Information | Mildred and Richard grew up as friends in Caroline County, Virginia, fell in love and got married. Richard, 24, was Caucasian, and Mildred, 19, was part African American and part American Indian.
3: Interracial marriage was illegal in Virginia. Any marriage would be considered "void" and would not have to be processed as a divorce.
4: Therefore the couple found a loophole and traveled to Washington DC on June 2, 1958, where interracial marriage was legal. | The newlywed couple returned to Virginia without knowing they were violating Virginia's interracial marriage laws. | On July 11, 1958 there was a warrant out for their arrest and on July 13, 1958 they were arrested.
5: Forced to leave, the Lovings returned to Washington DC.. | On January 6, 1969 the Lovings appeared in court and pleaded not guilty. | In order to escape their jail sentence, they changed their plea to guilty and had to leave Virginia immediately.
6: Missing their real home, the Lovings decided to risk it and move back to Caroline County, Virginia and live a secret life. | In 1963 Mildred sent a letter to the US attorney general Robert Kennedy to help. | Although he couldn't personally help, he sent a letter to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
7: The ACLU sent two Virginia lawyers, Bernard S Cohen and Philip J Hirschkop to help the Lovings. | On November 6, 1963 Cohen and Hirschkop filed a motion in VA. | On January 22, 1965 the state judge denied the motion to vacate sentences. | They appealed.
8: Lower Courts | The Lovings' attorney attacked all of the following laws which fell into these categories: | - the evasion law caused outrageous results - evasion law and interracial marriages were technically the same
9: - the law against interracial marriage was a relic of slavery - Virginia's law caused great social harm - Virginia's law was discriminatory and denied equal protection - Virginia's law violated due process
10: The argument presented by Virginia fell into these categories: - only portion of law under attack was the evasion statute - 14th amendment was not meant to interfere with the power of the individual states to outlaw interracial marriage
11: - the state had very good reasons for outlawing interracial marriage - laws about marriage should be left to the individual states to control
12: Judicial Questions | Would the court uphold the "right" of the individual states to determine who a person may marry and who he or she may not marry?
13: Would the Supreme Court uphold the right of the individual to marry as he or she pleased?
14: Outcome | It was a unanimous decision, all nine justices agreed on the outcome of the Lovings' appeal. | The court held that Virginia had violated the US Constitution by preventing marriages between people of different races.
15: The Court did not accept the states arguments that the laws should be upheld if there were any possible reason to decide that they serve a rational purpose.
16: Chief Justice Earl Warren said, "There is no question but the Virginia's miscegenation statutes rest solely upon distinctions drawn according to race. The statutes proscribe generally accepted conduct engaged in by members of different races."
18: The Court agreed with Virginia's argument, the framers of the 14th Amendment did not intend for antimiscegenation statutes to be affected by the new amendment, on the grounds that it could sometimes assist judges in interpreting a particular law. | The Court ruled in favor of the Lovings, overturning the Virginia law making interracial marriage illegal.
19: "Now i can put my arm around my wife in Virginia"
20: Aftermath | 1. Had its greatest impact on American society. | 2. Did not decrease violence caused by interracial marriage.
21: 3. A member of the KKK shot and killed 2 black males who were jogging with 2 white women because he opposed interracial marriage. | 4. Since the Loving decision, interracial marriages have increased 378% between 1970 and 1992
22: 5. In November 1998, South Carolina voters agreed to remove the ban on interracial marriage. | 6. Also in 1998 Alabama followed South Carolina in those actions.
23: 7. In 1996 at a high school in Alabama the principal announced interracial couples were not allowed at prom. The principal was then removed and all couples were allowed to attend.