ipl-logo

1967 Love V. Virginia Case Study

797 Words4 Pages

Within our Nation, interracial interaction hasn’t been the most forthcoming to equality and letting go of discrimination and segregation. After the Civil Rights Movement, certain aspects have gotten better towards the government changing and adding amendments and laws to make sure everyone had equal opportunities regardless of race, but there are still some state and local agencies that haven’t grasped the idea of equality among all. An example of this is the 1967 Love v. Virginia case that tried to incarcerate two individuals simply because they were an interracial married couple which violated the Fourteenth Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause under Due Process. In 1958, two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, a black woman, and Richard …show more content…

Virginia was claimed to be one of the 16 states that adopted the 1924 Racial Integrity Act which essentially had absolute prohibition against marriage licenses of a “white person” marrying other races besides another “white person”. So as the case went on after another conviction, the main idea question comes up to be did Virginia 's anti-miscegenation law in fact violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? When the Lovings got back to Virginia, the trial continued but on a much larger scale due to the Supreme Court getting involved to discuss whether or not the federal laws should correspond with state rules when it comes to marriage, and what the true meaning of Equal Protection Clause is and since the convictions aren’t directed towards one race in particular but to two different ones; so they (courts from Virginia) felt there was no discrimination present, and therefore no harm done towards violating the Equal Protection

Show More
Related
730 Words | 3 Pages

The fourteenth amendment states in the equal protection clause that states may not discriminate against any citizen for any reason, and must allow the same privileges, rights, and conservation. Hogan was on a mission to gain relief as well as compensation for the damages caused. The case was argued on March 22, 1982. The argument from Joe Hogan was proposed by advocate, Wilbur Colom. The petitioner’s side was presented by Hunter M. Gholson, in representation for Mississippi University for Women.

Read More
392 Words | 2 Pages

Kentucky v. King 1 Audelio Camacho Professor Alva AJ 180 3-27-17 Kentucky v. King The Supreme Court Case of Kentucky v. King occurred on October 2005, when Police officers in Lexington, Kentucky did a “buy bust operation in which a confidential informant attempted to buy crack cocaine from a suspected drug dealer.” The undercover was police officer Gibbons. When officer Gibbons gave the signal that the transaction was completed, the police approached the scene with their marked police cars. Once they were close to the suspect, Officer Gibbons radioed in a description of the suspect and said that King had gone through a specific hallway at a apartment complex. As the officers got to the hallway, a door was shut closed and the officers smelled

Read More
281 Words | 2 Pages

Did these laws indeed violate the Fourteenth Amendment? When the Lovings’s case reached the Supreme Court of Appeals, the Court supported the anti-miscegenation statutes and thus confirmed the convictions. This raises the question whether or not if the Supreme Court of Appeals violated the 14th Amendment too? The two people whose lives were most affected by the outcome of the decision were the Lovings’s.

Read More
148 Words | 1 Pages

The police actions were unjustifiable and unwarranted in this situation. In the court care of Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court ruled that, “deadly force may not be used unless there is a reasonable cause to believe there is a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others exists” (Hendrix, 2013, page 194). The use of physical force should not be used in the manner of vindictiveness, retaliation, or punishment purposes. This display of action is unprofessional and is against the code of conduct. The suspect’s actions of getting out of her vehicle warranted the use of force, because she approached the officer in a threating manner.

Read More
555 Words | 3 Pages

With this decision came a punishment for whoever decided to break this new law. The United States supremacy court said "that because its miscegenation statutes punished both white and black participants in an interracial marriage equally, they cannot be said to constitute invidious discrimination based on race and, therefore, the statutes commanded mere rational basis

Read More
701 Words | 3 Pages

United States v. Virginia: Equal Protection Nathan O’Hara Liberty High School 4A   United States v. Virginia is an equal rights case that argued whether it was constitutional for Virginia Military Institute (VMI) to deny women the opportunity to attend the all male Institute purely because of their genders (U.S. v. Virginia, 1996). Virginia was accused of violating the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and trying to make an all female institution as a substitute for not accepting women (U.S. v. Virginia, 1996). In response Virginia created the Virginia Women’s Institute for Leadership (VWIL) as a female alternative located at the already all female Mary Baldwin College (Chicago-Kent College of Law, 2015b).

Read More
1141 Words | 5 Pages

Loving v. The Commonwealth of Virginia was a case that redefined marriage in the 20th century by extending the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment to include and protect freedom to marry through the declaration that “marriage is a basic civil right (Loving v. Virginia).” The case involves the marriage of Richard Loving, a white male, and Mildred Loving nee Jeter, an African American woman, who were both from various parts of Caroline County, VA. The pair met at a music venue where Mildred’s brother’s band was performing (Report on Loving Case, 2009). They were instantly smitten and by 1957 their oldest son Sydney was born. They exchanged vows just a year after his birth; however, this wedding violated Virginia state codes as it was

Read More
784 Words | 4 Pages

In the stories of Loving V. Virginia and “ Desiree’s baby ” both take place back in the day when racism was prevalent. The United States Supreme Court invalidated laws prohibiting interracial marriage. Although one of them is a fictional story while for the other one is an article on a real case that happened. After a close reading of Loving V. Virginia and the fictional story Desiree 's Baby by Kate Cho both couples react to interracial marriage in a way that demonstrates race relations don’t allow them to be happy and they believe they are as equal as anybody else and deserve to live how they choose to live. Loving V. Virginia took place in 1967 back then normal couples were considered as two people of the same race.

Read More
215 Words | 1 Pages

In the movie “The Loving Story”, the director Nancy Buirski presents a story about love and fight for the right of interracial marriage and social justice. In 1958, a white man whose name Richard Loving and his black fiancée Mildred Jeter travelled from Virginia to Washington to get married in a time when interracial marriage was illegal in most of the states in the United States including Virginia, according to the movie. However, the director shows that Mildred and Richard Loving were arrested in Virginia when they came back for violating a Virginia law that forbidden marriage between people of different races. Therefore, the couple had to leave Virginia so that they can live together with their children in Washington, D.C. A long way from

Read More
1081 Words | 5 Pages

The Supreme Court Case of Loving v. Virginia in 1967 was widely known because it helped to set a better future for interracial marriages. On July 11, 1958, newlyweds Richard and Mildred Loving were asleep in bed when three armed police officers burst into their room. The couple were hauled from their house and thrown into jail for their marriage. At that time, 24 states across the country had laws strictly prohibiting marriage between people of different races. In order to evade Virginia’s Racial Integrity Act, the pair had traveled to Washington, D.C. for the ceremony.

Read More
268 Words | 2 Pages

Their civil rights case, Loving versus Virginia, went to the Supreme Court, and it ultimately marked a monumental time in American history. For the first time, laws prohibiting interracial marriage were struck down. Richard and Mildred initially pleaded guilty. The judge ruled one year in jail as well as banishment

Read More
1329 Words | 6 Pages

The ruling thus lent high judicial support to racial and ethnic discrimination and led to wider spread of the segregation between Whites and Blacks in the Southern United States. The great oppressive consequence from this was discrimination against African American minority from the socio-political opportunity to share the same facilities with the mainstream Whites, which in most of the cases the separate facilities for African Americans were inferior to those for Whites in actuality. The doctrine of “separate but equal” hence encourages two-tiered pluralism in U.S. as it privileged the non-Hispanic Whites over other racial and ethnic minority

Read More
1050 Words | 5 Pages

The fight for racial equality remains today and has not lost its significance despite its setbacks. The state of civil

Read More
283 Words | 2 Pages

Even though there has been a significant percentage increase among inter-ethnic and inter-racial couples, these relationships are not a solution to ending racism nationwide. These relationships

Read More
1039 Words | 5 Pages

Nearly 84 years later, the Supreme Court overturned the previous rulings of Pace v. Alabama with the case, Loving v. Virginia. that finalized the legalization of interracial marriage. The case is distinguished for fighting against the laws that prohibited marriage rights for interracial couples. Both Richard and Mildred Loving were robbed of their marriage rights because of Virginia’s laws preventing amalgamation of races. Virginia police officers had intruded into their house, disregarding the 4th amendment that was passed in 1791.

Read More

More about 1967 Love V. Virginia Case Study

Related Topics

Open Document