Loving V. Virginia
In 1953, twenty-three year Richard Loving (white) and seventeen year old Mildred Jeter (black), who lived in Virginia at the time, went to the District of Columbia to get married to avoid violating Virginia’s anti-miscegenation, or interracial marriage, laws. When they moved back to Virginia, a grand jury of the Caroline County Circuit Court in October of 1958 issued a charge against the Lovings for breaking anti-miscegenation statutes in the Virginia law code. On January 6, 1959, the Lovings pleaded guilty to the charge and were sentenced to one year in prison, but the judge suspended their rule on one condition: that they stayed out of the state of Virginia for twenty five years. The judge in the case, Leon M. Bazile, …show more content…
They alleged that the Virginia anti-miscegenation statutes were unconstitutional and wanted to stop Virginia state officials from enforcing them. On January 22, 1965, the state trial judge denied the motion to vacate the sentences, and upheld the anti-miscegenation laws as constitutional, agreeing with the Lovings original convictions that they had violated the Virginia code sections: 28-50, 29-50, and 20-57. Section 28-50 said that leaving state to interracially marry with the intention of returning shall result in the punishment explained in section 29-50, which says cohabitation as man and wife in this state shall be evidence of marriage. Section 29-50 states that a violation of miscegenation laws shall be a felony and the convicted will be sentenced from 1-5 years in a penitentiary. Lastly, section 20-57 states that all marriages between "a white person and a colored person" are null and void without any judicial proceeding. The Virginia Court of Appeals used the 1955 court’s decision in Naim v. Naim as precedent to uphold their decision in favor of Virginia. Naim v. Naim involved Ruby Elaine(white) and Han Say(Chinese) who left the state of Virginia for North Carolina to legally marry. Upon returning to Virginia, Elaine decided that instead of divorcing Say, she could sue to have their marriage annulled on …show more content…
Virginia case. Obergefell V. Hodges was another case involving the law restricting marriage. Instead of race, however, it was sexual orientation. The Supreme Court decision ruled in favor of gay marriage and made it legal in all fifty states, but there was not the same unanimous decision of the justices as in Loving V. Virginia. Although in Loving V. Virginia all the supreme justices voted in one way, much of the public was in disagreement, especially in the South. The fourteenth amendment protected the marriage rights of both interracial and homosexual couples and would most likely do the same if another issue relating to equal protection in marriage made it to the Supreme
In 1953, twenty-three year Richard Loving (white) and seventeen year old Mildred Jeter (black), who lived in Virginia at the time, went to the District of Columbia to get married to avoid violating Virginia’s anti-miscegenation, or interracial marriage, laws. When they moved back to Virginia, a grand jury of the Caroline County Circuit Court in October of 1958 issued a charge against the Lovings for breaking anti-miscegenation statutes in the Virginia law code. On January 6, 1959, the Lovings pleaded guilty to the charge and were sentenced to one year in prison, but the judge suspended their rule on one condition: that they stayed out of the state of Virginia for twenty five years. The judge in the case, Leon M. Bazile, …show more content…
They alleged that the Virginia anti-miscegenation statutes were unconstitutional and wanted to stop Virginia state officials from enforcing them. On January 22, 1965, the state trial judge denied the motion to vacate the sentences, and upheld the anti-miscegenation laws as constitutional, agreeing with the Lovings original convictions that they had violated the Virginia code sections: 28-50, 29-50, and 20-57. Section 28-50 said that leaving state to interracially marry with the intention of returning shall result in the punishment explained in section 29-50, which says cohabitation as man and wife in this state shall be evidence of marriage. Section 29-50 states that a violation of miscegenation laws shall be a felony and the convicted will be sentenced from 1-5 years in a penitentiary. Lastly, section 20-57 states that all marriages between "a white person and a colored person" are null and void without any judicial proceeding. The Virginia Court of Appeals used the 1955 court’s decision in Naim v. Naim as precedent to uphold their decision in favor of Virginia. Naim v. Naim involved Ruby Elaine(white) and Han Say(Chinese) who left the state of Virginia for North Carolina to legally marry. Upon returning to Virginia, Elaine decided that instead of divorcing Say, she could sue to have their marriage annulled on …show more content…
Virginia case. Obergefell V. Hodges was another case involving the law restricting marriage. Instead of race, however, it was sexual orientation. The Supreme Court decision ruled in favor of gay marriage and made it legal in all fifty states, but there was not the same unanimous decision of the justices as in Loving V. Virginia. Although in Loving V. Virginia all the supreme justices voted in one way, much of the public was in disagreement, especially in the South. The fourteenth amendment protected the marriage rights of both interracial and homosexual couples and would most likely do the same if another issue relating to equal protection in marriage made it to the Supreme