Loving v. Virginia

Loving v. Virginia
Name	Loving v. Virginia
Caption	Mildred and Richard Loving in 1965.
Argudate	April 10, 1967
Decideddate	June 12, 1967
Fullname	Richard Perry Loving, Mildred Jeter Loving v. Virginia
Citations	388 U.S. 1 (1967)
Prior	Defendants convicted, Caroline County Circuit Court (January 6, 1959); motion to vacate sentence denied (January 22, 1965); affirmed, 206 Va. 924, 147 S.E.2d 78 (1966); cert. granted, 385 U.S. 986 (1967).
Holding	Laws prohibiting interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Scotus	1965–1969
Majority	Warren
Joinmajority	unanimous
Lawsapplied	U.S. Const. amend. XIV; Virginia Code §§ 20–58, 20–59 (1960)

Contents

Background and Legal Context
The Lovings and Their Case
Supreme Court Decision
Legal and Social Impact

Loving v. Virginia. *Loving v. Virginia* was a landmark 1967 decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that unanimously struck down state laws prohibiting interracial marriage. The ruling held that such statutes violated the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This case was a pivotal victory in the broader Civil Rights Movement, establishing marriage as a fundamental right and dismantling a major legal pillar of racial segregation in the United States.

Background and Legal Context

By the mid-20th century, numerous states, primarily but not exclusively in the Southern United States, enforced anti-miscegenation laws that criminalized marriage and cohabitation between individuals classified as belonging to different races. These laws had deep historical roots, extending back to the colonial era and were reinforced during the Jim Crow period to maintain white supremacy and racial purity. The Commonwealth of Virginia's Racial Integrity Act of 1924 was one of the most stringent, prohibiting marriage between "white" and "colored" persons and relying on the controversial "one-drop rule" for racial classification. Prior to *Loving*, the Supreme Court had avoided directly confronting the constitutionality of such laws. In 1883, in *Pace v. Alabama*, it upheld an anti-miscegenation law, and as recently as 1955, in *Naim v. Naim*, it dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds, allowing these statutes to persist even as the Court began dismantling other forms of segregation in cases like *Brown v. Board of Education*.

The Lovings and Their Case

The plaintiffs, Mildred Loving (née Jeter, a woman of African American and Native American descent) and Richard Loving (a white man), were residents of Central Point, Virginia. They married in Washington, D.C., in June 1958, where interracial marriage was legal, and then returned to their home in Caroline County, Virginia. In July 1958, they were arrested in their bedroom under a warrant based on Virginia's anti-miscegenation statutes. They pleaded guilty to "cohabiting as man and wife, against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth" and were sentenced to one year in prison. The trial judge, Leon M. Bazile, suspended the sentence on the condition that the couple leave Virginia and not return together for 25 years, citing God's supposed separation of the races. The Lovings moved to Washington, D.C., but longed to return home. In 1963, inspired by the growing Civil Rights Movement, Mildred Loving wrote to Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy for help. He referred her to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Attorneys Bernard S. Cohen and Philip J. Hirschkop took the case, filing a motion to vacate the sentence in Virginia state court, which set the stage for a federal constitutional challenge.

Supreme Court Decision

The case was argued before the Warren Court on April 10, 1967. The Lovings' legal team, led by Cohen and Hirschkop, argued that Virginia's laws were a "bare and arbitrary" racial classification that served no legitimate state purpose and violated the Fourteenth Amendment. The state of Virginia, represented by Robert D. McIlwaine, argued that the law applied equally to both races and was thus not discriminatory, and that states had the right to regulate marriage. In a unanimous decision authored by Chief Justice Earl Warren and issued on June 12, 1967, the Court soundly rejected Virginia's arguments. The Court held that the law's clear purpose was to maintain white supremacy and that its racial classifications were "odious to a free people." The Court found the statutes violated the Equal Protection Clause because they were solely based on racial distinctions and served no legitimate state interest. Simultaneously, the Court ruled they violated the Due Process Clause because marriage is a "basic civil right of man," fundamental to individual liberty. The decision overturned the convictions and invalidated all remaining state anti-miscegenation laws across the nation.

Loving v. Virginia

Background and Legal Context

The Lovings and Their Case

Supreme Court Decision

Legal and Social Impact