Interracial marriage: Respecting the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
I. INTRODUCTION
This case note will examine the 1967 landmark Supreme Court case of Loving v. Virginia. The Loving v. Virginia case touched on constitutional principles including equality, federalism, and liberty. Just over 30 years ago, it was a crime for interracial couples in Virginia to marry, or to live as husband and wife. Prior to the 1967 case of Loving v. Virginia, many states had laws that banned the intermarriage of whites with black or other minorities. The United States has a long history of the existence of anti-miscegenation laws that forbid interracial marriage. The case presents the constitutional question whether a statutory scheme adopted by the State of Virginia to prevent marriages between persons solely on the basis of racial classifications violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The right that is guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, contains the right to be treated the same, legally, as others in the same situation. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution forbids states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws . The equal protection jurisprudence in the United States has evolved greatly. Well-known cases covering the Equal Protection Clause are Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, considering the de-segregation of public schools and Korematsu v. United States in 1944, when the Court first articulated a strict scrutiny standard for laws based on race-based distinctions. This strict scrutiny standard was applied again in the Loving v. Virginia case in 1967. In 1967, the Supreme Court’s had to decide if these anti-miscegenation statutes were unconstitutional. The Supreme Court declared, in a unanimous decision, Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute, the "Racial