Loving V. Virginia Racial Discrimination Case Study

Loving v. Virginia - Racial Discrimination

Racial Discrimination: Loving v. Virginia

The issue presented in Loving v. Virginia (1967) was rather national basis was the proper standard of review to use in order to evaluate constitutionality. There were statutes in Virginia that may not have been constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause. Additionally, the Equal Protection Clause should not/does not allow a restriction on the freedom to marry solely based on the race of the individuals who plan to get married. There was laws enacted in Virginia that made it a felony for black and white people to intermarry, and when that took place many took issue with the constitutionality of that law

. The Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia upheld the law, because it stated that "racial integrity" was important and should be preserved for the citizens of the state. It was also argued that both black and white were being punished and/or discriminated against, so there was no actual racial discrimination taking place. With that in mind, it was stated that the statute was well within the rights of Virginia law

The Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution of the United States was called into question and analyzed. In that Clause, the issue is that everyone deserves equal protection under the law, and that it is not proper or acceptable to discriminate based on any characteristic that a person cannot change

. In other words, issues such as race or gender are not open to discrimination because they are not characteristics that a person can change or elect to avoid or adjust.While Virginia was convinced that discriminating based on race as long as it was more than one race was acceptable, there were others who did not believe that this was the case

. In order to better understand the reasoning here, it is necessary to see both sides of the argument.

Those who believed that the statute was legal and proper based their argument on the idea that the statute was affecting more than one race, so it was not discriminating against people in a racial way

. In order to be truly discriminatory, the statute would have to select one race and deny that race something, while not denying it to any and all other races. Preserving the alleged racial integrity of the area was very important to individuals who were concerned about racial mixture and interaction. With that in mind, the statute was made in an effort to ensure that racial mixing did not take place

. Whether this was actually "racist" or the people behind the law truly believed that what they were doing was right was not the issue at hand, and there was more to consider than just what a group of lawmakers wanted and needed to "protect" their state and society. The will of the people also matters, and when the will of the people is strong the laws may have to be changed and adjusted to reflect the people and the times in which….....