{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Brief - Loving v Virginia - REASONING In the case of Loving...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Name: Dang Doan-Hai Nguyen Date: 01/08/2010 Case Brief Loving v. Virginia FACTS : In 1958, two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, a Negro woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, were married in the District of Columbia. After returning to Virginia, the Lovings were then charged with violating the state's antimiscegenation statute, which banned inter-racial marriages. The couple were found guilty in the state of Virginia’s court and sentenced to a year in prison, with the sentence suspended for 25 years on condition that the couple would leave the state of Virginia and not return for 25 years. ISSUE : Did the state of Virginia's antimiscegenation law violate the federal Due Process and Equal Protection clauses? DECISION : Yes. The conviction must be reversed
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: REASONING : In the case of Loving v. Virginia, the state of Virginia argued that the statute was legitimate because it applied equally to both blacks and whites and found that racial classifications were not subject to a "rational purpose" test under the 14th Amendment. Also, the Framers of the Constitution or the Framers of the 14th Amendment didn't intend to make mixed marriage statutes unconstitutional. However, the Supreme Court denied this argument because the 14 th Amendment was clearly created to eliminate all official state sources of violating racial discrimination in the States. Thus, the Virginia’s statute is not valid because it against the right of freedom and it is an example of white supremacy....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online