LOVING EQUALITY
71
by any statute constitute an arbitrary and invidious discrimination.
49
The
Court concluded that “[t]here can be no doubt that restricting the freedom
to marry solely because of racial classifications violates the central mean-
ing of the Equal Protection Clause.
50
The Court then turned to the Lovings’ due process claim. The Court
noted that “the freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the
vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free
men,
51
and that denial of this right on:
so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications . . . [is] so
subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Four-
teenth Amendment . . . [that it deprives] all the State’s citizens
of liberty without due process of law. . . . Under our Constitu-
tion, the freedom to marry or not marry, a person of another
race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the
State
.
52
IV. Intermediate or Skeptical Scrutiny?
Although sex discrimination is prohibited by the Fourteenth Amendment’s
Equal Protection Clause
,
53
this form of discrimination has not garnered
judicial support for the application of “strict scrutiny” used for racial and
49
.
50
Id
. at 12.
51
Id.
.
52
Id
..
53
United States v. Virginia
,
.
1...,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70 72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,...304