Loving V. Commonwealth Of Virginia Case Study

1077 Words 5 Pages
Harry L. Carrico (September 4, 1916- January 27, 2013)
Harry Lee Carrico was known for serving more than 50 years on the Supreme Court of Virginia (Slayton & Schapiro, 2013). Mr. Carrico followed his passion to relentlessly serve others by joining the Supreme Court of Virginia in 1961 (Slayton & Schapiro, 2013). Additionally, Mr. Carrico served 22 years as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia until he was mandatorily required to retire at the age of 86 on January 31, 2003 (Slayton & Schapiro, 2013). Notwithstanding his retirement, Mr. Carrico continued to sporadically hear cases as a Senior Justice and joined the faculty at the University Of Richmond School Of Law in 2004 as a visiting professor of law and civil engagement (Slayton
…show more content…
Carrico was known for endorsing Virginia’s Miscegenation Statute in the landmark case of Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Wikipedia, 2016). The case of Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia involved Richard Loving (Caucasian male) and Mildred Loving (African American female) whom were sentenced to one year in prison. Subsequently, the Loving’s sentences were suspended on the condition that they leave the Commonwealth of Virginia and not return for 25 years together (Wikipedia, 2016). The Loving’s appealed their case and in 1967 the SCOTUS ruled that the anti-miscegenation laws were racist and had been legislated to perpetuate white supremacy (Wikipedia, 2016). In brief, the SCOTUS reliance that marriage is one of the many basic civil rights of man and a fundamental freedom which should not be deprived based on race or sex (Wikipedia, 2016). Judges whom are selected should not be biased nor infringe on the rights of mankind (Gustitis, …show more content…
II § 2, Cl.2.), Article III Judges (federal trial court, appellate court and the Supreme court) are nominated by the President and Congress through the Senate approves that person by a majority vote (FindLaw, 2016). On the other hand, state court judges are appointed, selected by a merit system or elected (partisan or non-partisan) (FindLaw, 2016). Appointed state judges are chosen by the governor or legislature, while judges chosen by a legislative committee through the merit selection is based on the judge’s past judicial performance (FindLaw, 2016). Judges selected through partisan elections are voted in by the Electoral College and generally run as part of a political party, while non-partisan judicial candidates must put their names on ballot without disclosing their affiliated political party (FindLaw, 2016). In order to determine the most effective way to select judges we must understand the advantages and disadvantages of judicial appointments and judicial

Related Documents