Loving V. Virginia Case Study

665 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Topic loving v virginia

Seventeen-year-old Mildred Jeter, who was African-Indian, and her childhood sweetheart, twenty-three-year-old white construction worker, Richard Loving were against Virginia's miscegenation laws banning marriage between blacks and whites. During 1924, interracial marriage was illegal in Virginia. The Racial Integrity Laws were designed in the South meaning that the white race and its purity was protected from racial mixtures. Mildred and Richard married on June 2, 1958, in Washington, D.C. After they returned to their hometown, Caroline County, they were arrested and charged with unlawful cohabitation. The couple was sued and imprison of violating the state's anti-miscegenation law. The punishment was a one year in jail or The court suspended the sentences, “a period of twenty-five years upon the provision that both accused leave Caroline County and the state of Virginia at once and do not return together or at the same time to said county and state for a period of twenty-five years." The Lovings left their hometown to live in Washington D.C. Mildred, who was missing her home couldn’t hold back anymore so she wrote to Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy for help. The couple was referred to the Supreme Court with the case called Loving v. Virginia in 1967. They successfully defeated Virginia's ban on …show more content…

Virginia, eternally changed the laws of the U.S and the lives of its citizens. In 1967, sixteen states had laws against interracial marriage. the Lovings inspired mixed race couples to seek out and bring their importance to the history. It analyses the miscegenation crime Mildred and Richard were accused of doing. They gave the right for interracial couples to be together, the freedom to love and etc. These laws did not only affect black people and white people but many states also limited relationships with Asians, Native Americans, Indians, Hispanics and other

Show More
Related

  • Case Citation: Kentucky V. King 563 US

    720 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the Lexington, Kentucky a drug operation occurred at an apartment complex. Police officers of Lexington, Kentucky followed a suspected drug dealer into an apartment complex. The officers smelled marijuana outside the door of one of the apartments, as they knocked loudly the officers announced their presence. There were noises coming from the inside of the apartment; the officers believed that the noises were as the sound of destroying evidence. The officers stated that they were about to enter the apartment and kicked the apartment door in in order to save the save any evidence from being destroyed. Once the officer enters the apartment; there the respondent and others were found. The officers took the respondent and the other individuals that were in the apartment into custody. The King and the

    Read More

  • John Ernst Steinbeck

    1348 Words  | 3 Pages

    helped support the struggling couple. They divorced in 1942. She lived in Carmel Valley, CA after and died February 8, 1983.

    Read More

  • Georgia Vs. Randolph Case Study

    1227 Words  | 3 Pages

    .... Madison was applied to this decision because the actions committed were unconstitutional. According to the Supreme Court the 8th Amendment was broken because the District Court of Appeal was giving a cruel and unusual punishment to Graham. The 8th amendment claus does not allow a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in jail without a parole for a non-homicidal crime. Therefore Terrance could not fall through with this punishment.

    Read More

  • Good Wives, Nasty Wenches, and Anxious Patriarchs: Gender, Race, and Power in Colonial Virginia

    1446 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Colonial Virginia in 1661, Rebecca Nobles was sentenced to ten lashes for bearing an illegitimate child. Had she been an indentured servant she would also have been ordered to serve her master an additional two years to repay his losses incurred during her pregnancy. After 1662, had she been an enslaved African woman she would not have been prosecuted, because in that year the Colonial government declared children born to slave women the property of their mother's master. A child born to a slave brought increased wealth, whereas the child of an indentured servant brought increased financial responsibility. This evolving legislation in Colonial Virginia reflected elite planter interests in controlling women's sexuality for economic gain. Race is also defined and manipulated to reinforce the authority and economic power of elite white men who enacted colonial legislation. As historian Kathleen M. Brown demonstrates in her book Good Wives, Nasty Wenches and Anxious Patriarchs, the concepts of gender and race intersect as colonial Virginians consolidated power and defined their society. Indeed, gender and race were integral to that goal. In particular, planter manipulations of social categories had a profound effect on the economic and political climate in Colonial Virginia.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Obergefell V. Hodges

    700 Words  | 2 Pages

    Abstract On June 26, 2015 a divided Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case Obergefell v. Hodges that same-sex couples could now marry nationwide. At the time of the split ruling there were 9 supreme court justices, 5 of the justices were Republicans, and the remaining 4 were Democrats. In high profile cases it is except that the justices will vote along party lines. When the 5-4 ruling was reveled by the following statement. “It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right (Corn,2015).” written by

    Read More

  • Case Brief: McCulloch v. Maryland

    406 Words  | 1 Pages

    McCulloch v Maryland 4 Wheat. (17 U.S.) 316 (1819) Issue      May Congress charter a bank even though it is not an expressly granted power? Holding      Yes, Congress may charter a bank as an implied power under the “necessary and proper” clause. Rationale      The Constitution was created to correct the weaknesses of the Articles. The word “expressly” particularly caused major problems and therefore was omitted from the Constitution, because if everything in the Constitution had to be expressly stated it would weaken the power of the Federal government.

    Read More

  • Loving Movie Essay

    660 Words  | 2 Pages

    The movie, Loving, directed by Jeff Nichols is based on a true story about Richard, and Mildred Loving, an interracial couple fighting for their rights to stay married, and be able to raise their family in the state of Virginia where in the 1950’s it was illegal to be married to a race other than your own. Richard Loving grew up in a small town called Caroline County in the state of Virginia, where he met Mildred and knew that he would do anything to be able to call Mildred his wife. Richard proposed to Mildred on an estate of land he bought for them to raise a family on one day. Mildred agrees to marry him, but unfortunately, they are aware that in the state of Virginia it is illegal for them to get married because of their anti-miscegenation law. They agree that they will go to Washington, D.C., where they will be able to become legally married. In 1958, Richard and Mildred Loving became legally married in Washington, D.C. When they return home to the State of Virginia they are harassed by the Caroline County police and thrown into jail because they got married outside of the state that they reside in, which is illegal in Virginia. Richard is set out on bail, but Mildred is forced to stay in jail for several more days. Richard and Mildred’s case was presented before a judge to decide the ramifications of their actions.

    Read More

  • Miscegenation Case Analysis

    991 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the Loving v. Virginia, 388 US 1 (1967) is the landmark ruling that nullified anti-miscegenation laws in the United States. In June 1958, Mildred Loving, a black female, married Richard Loving, a white male, in Washington, DC. The couple traveled to Central Point, Virginia and their home was raided by the local police. The police charged the Loving’s of interracial marriage, a felony charge under Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code which prohibited interracial marriages. On January 6, 1959, the couple pled guilty and received a suspended sentence with the agreement that they would Virginia and not return for 25 years. In November 6, 1963, the couple filed a motion in the state court to vacate the original judgment on the grounds it violated the Fourteenth Amendment.

    Read More

  • Race and Ethnicity in the United States Still Matters

    1274 Words  | 3 Pages

    It was not that long ago that interracial marriage was prohibited in the United States. In fact, in 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court decision established that anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional. Laws against interracial marriage were unfair and unconstitutional according to the 14th amendment, which granted citizens the right to equal protection of the law and due process. The famous case that granted the right to marry interracially was Loving vs. Virginia. In June 1958, two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, an African American woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, were married in the District of Columbia where it was legal. When returning back home the Lovings were charged with violating Virginia's ban on interracial marriages. The couple...

    Read More

  • William Wells Brown and the Jefferson and Hemings Scandal

    1767 Words  | 4 Pages

    Rothman, Joshua D. "James Callender and Social Knowledge of Interracial Sex in Antebellum Virginia." Jan Ellen Lewis, and Peter S. Onuf. Sally Hemings & Thomas Jefferson: History, Memory, and Civic Culture. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1999.

    Read More

  • Tennessee V. Garner Case Study

    371 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Tennessee v. Garner case impacted law enforcement agencies today by utilizing the Fourth Amendment right of not using deadly force to prevent a suspect from fleeing unless the officer is in imminent danger of their life. Consequently, before this was set into place, an officer had the right to use deadly force on a fleeing suspect by all means.” The first time the Court dealt with the use of force was in Tennessee v. Garner, in Garner, a police officer used deadly force despite being "reasonably sure" that the suspect was an unarmed teenager "of slight build" who was running away from him” (Gross,2016). Whereas, with Graham v. Conner case was surrounded around excessive force which also has an impact on law enforcement agencies in today’s society as well. “All claims that law enforcement officers have used excessive force deadly or not in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other “seizure” of s free citizen should be analyzed under the Fourth Amendment and its “reasonableness” standard” (Doerner,2016).

    Read More

  • Roe Vs. Wade

    907 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Roe v. Wade case originated in the state of Texas in 1970 at the suggestion of Sarah Weddington an Austin attorney. Norma McCorvey otherwise known as "Jane Roe" was an unmarried pregnant woman seeking to overturn the anti-abortion law in the state of Texas. The lawsuit claimed that the statue was unconstitutionally vague and abridged privacy rights of pregnant women guaranteed by the first, fourth, fifth, ninth, and fourteenth amendments to the constitution. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade)

    Read More

  • Loving v. Virginia

    1477 Words  | 3 Pages

    Miscegenation: Noun; Marriage, cohabitation, or sexual relations between two members of two separate races. Most commonly used in reference to relations between African Americans and Caucasian Americans (blacks and whites.) In 1960’s nearly 4 out of every 225 marriages was interracial. This was frowned upon in the early to mid 1900’s and this is what two people, Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving had to face. Racial indifference or a racial supremacy has been an issue in America as long as it has existed. It began with the Native Americans on this soil we thrive on today. The whites of the time pushed the Natives of what land they could and fooled them off of the rest of it. They took their children, and tried to conform them into a race they were not, and never would be. From there on, our nation grew larger and more independent. In 1619, 127 years after North America had been discovered, a Dutch man traded his cargo of Africans for food. This gave our nation its first group of “servants.” The uproar of slavery did not start until the 1680’s as far as the records show.

    Read More

  • Loving v. Virginia (388 U.S. 1)

    2066 Words  | 5 Pages

    On July 11, 1958 a couple of hours after midnight, Richard Loving a white man and Mildred Loving an African American woman were awakened to the presence of three officers in their bedroom. One of the three officers demanded from Richard to identify the woman next to him. Mildred, full of fear, told the officers that she was his wife, while Richard pointed to the marriage license on the wall. The couple was then charged and later found guilty in violation of the state's anti-miscegenation statute.

    Read More

  • Terry V. Ohio Case Study

    1225 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Terry v. Ohio (1968), Terry and two other men were noticed by police officers to be hanging around a store, and seemed to possibly be “casing a job.” They were afraid the men might be getting ready to rob the store, due to their appearance and their actions. An officer stopped the men and frisked them. They found guns on them, and arrested them (Oyez, n.d.).

    Read More

More about Loving V. Virginia Case Study

Open Document