Facts
- Richard Loving (white) and Mildred Jeter Loving (Black) married in the District of Columbia in 1958 and returned to Virginia.
- Virginia indicted the couple under statutes criminalizing interracial marriage and prohibiting leaving the state to marry across racial lines and returning.
- The couple pleaded guilty and received one-year jail sentences, suspended on the condition that they leave Virginia and not return together for 25 years.
- After relocating to the District of Columbia, the Lovings sought to vacate their convictions, asserting violations of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- The Virginia trial court denied relief; the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia affirmed the constitutionality of the statutes (while modifying the sentence).
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted review to decide whether Virginia could restrict marriage solely on the basis of racial classifications.
Issues
- Whether Virginia’s prohibition of interracial marriage violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Whether Virginia’s prohibition of interracial marriage violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by infringing the freedom to marry.
- Whether a criminal statute using racial classifications can be sustained on the theory that it applies “equally” to both races.
Decision
- The Supreme Court unanimously reversed.
- The Court held that Virginia’s interracial marriage bans violated the Equal Protection Clause because they rested solely on racial classifications and lacked any legitimate purpose independent of racial discrimination.
- The Court rejected the “equal application” argument that punishing both spouses removes constitutional infirmity.
- The Court also held that the statutes violated Due Process because marriage is a fundamental liberty, and the state could not deny that freedom on a racial basis.
- The ruling invalidated state laws prohibiting interracial marriage.
Legal Principles
- Racial classifications in criminal laws are constitutionally suspect and subject to the most rigorous judicial review; they require a legitimate, non-discriminatory justification.
- A statute is not saved from Equal Protection review merely because it imposes the same penalty on members of different races; the presence of racial classifications remains constitutionally significant.
- The freedom to marry is a fundamental right protected by the Due Process Clause; a state may not restrict that right using racial classifications.
- A law making criminality depend on the race of the actor is facially incompatible with the Fourteenth Amendment.
Conclusion
The Court held that Virginia could not prohibit interracial marriage because the challenged statutes were racial classifications without a legitimate non-discriminatory purpose and because they infringed the fundamental liberty to marry, violating both Equal Protection and Due Process.