MEMORANDUM OF LAW To: Mrs. Moore From: Mayra Sgura Date: April 4, 2012 Subject: Loving v.

Virginia Loving v. Virginia 388 U.S. 1, 87 S. Ct. 1817, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1010, 1967 U.S. 1082

Statement of Facts: June of 1958 Mr. Richard Perry Loving and Mrs. Mildred Delores Jeter an African- American woman and her husband were both residents of Commonwealth, Virginia who left to get married in the District of Columbia because of the Racial Integrity Act. The Racial Integrity Act is a law in the state of Virginia that bans marriages between any white person and any non-white person. When the couple returned to their home state of Virginia, one night a group of police officers entered their home in hopes of catching the couple in a compromising situation which was also a crime in Virginia. Mrs. Loving pointed out that they were married and gestured at their to there marriage certificate but instead of helping them it became a central piece of evidence which proved they were married in another state which was also against the law in the state of Virginia. And on January 6, 1959 the couple pled guilty to the charges of: violating the Racial Integrity Act and Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code which prohibited couples to marry out of state and later return to the state. The couple was sentenced to one year instead of a twenty-five year sentence with the condition that they leave their home town of Virginia. The couple later moved to the District of Columbia. In November 6, 1963 the American Civil Liberties Union filed a motion to the state trial court requesting to void the judgment and remove the sentence because it violated the Fourteenth Amendment.

Issue: Did the sentence violate the 14th amendment because the white and non-white people were discriminated equally?

Rule: The Fourteenth Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the

United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Analysis: The Fourteenth Amendment wanted to eliminate all racial discrimination. Not create equal discrimination. Conclusion: The court ruled that Virginias Anti-Miscegenation Statute violated both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court concluded that Anti-Miscegenation laws were kept but unenforced in several states until 2000.