LOVING EQUALITY
67
The primary justifications for the constitutionality of anti-miscegenation
laws were:
1. They applied equally to members of each race, and thus were not
discriminatory;
2. The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment specified that its purpose
and effect would not to eliminate anti-miscegenation laws; and
3. The Tenth Amendment leaves the regulation of marriage to the
states
.
34
The public policy arguments centered on the importance of preserving
“racial purity” for all races (but, of course, only for the white race, because
other non-whites could marry individuals of a different race or ethnicity as
long as they were not Caucasian)
.
35
It was in this context that Richard
and Mildred Loving challenged their arrest and banishment from Virginia,
a challenge that changed history.
III.
Loving v. Virginia
Mildred Jeter, an African-American woman, and Richard Loving, a white
man, grew up together in a small Virginia town and were high school sweet-
hearts. They travelled to the District of Columbia in 1958 and were married
there because Virginia law prohibited marriage between a white man and
34 Walter Wadlington,
The Loving Case: Virginia’s Anti-Miscegenation Statute in Histori-
cal Perspective
,
.
35
Id
. at 1222.
1...,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66 68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,...304