Bernard Cohen, Lawyer Who Argued Loving V. Virginia Case, Dies At 86 Cohen was just a few years out of law school when the ACLU asked if he would take on the case of Richard and Mildred Loving — an interracial couple whose marriage was illegal in their home state.
In Loving v. Virginia, the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals upholds the state's antimiscegenation laws. The Court also sets aside the original conviction of Richard and Mildred Loving, finding that a sentence requiring the defendants to leave the state is "unreasonable." The U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments in the case of Loving v.
When caught living together in Virginia, the couple was convicted of violating the anti- miscegenation law. They were sentenced to either one year in prison, or to leave Virginia for 25 years. The Lovings eventually filed suit both in Federal and State court to vacate the convictions and sentences.
After the state court rejected the Lovings’ challenge, the case was accepted for review by Virginia’s Supreme Court of Appeals, which upheld the constitutionality of 20-58 and 20-59 but voided the sentences because the condition under which they were suspended was, in its view, “unreasonable.” Citing its earlier decision in Naim v.
Bernard S. CohenThe Lovings did not attend the oral arguments in Washington, but one of their lawyers, Bernard S. Cohen, conveyed the personal message he had been given by Richard Loving: "Mr. Cohen, tell the Court I love my wife, and it is just unfair that I can't live with her in Virginia."
The Virginia law, the Court found, had no legitimate purpose "independent of invidious racial discrimination." The Court rejected the state's argument that the statute was legitimate because it applied equally to both blacks and whites and found that racial classifications were not subject to a "rational purpose" test ...
actor Nick KrollThe Lovings and their ordeal were dramatized in films including the 2016 movie “Loving” by director Jeff Nichols, in which actor Nick Kroll portrayed Mr. Cohen. The case had been revived in the public consciousness a year earlier, when Loving v.
The couple had to flee Virginia to avoid prison time In 1958, the couple was jolted out of their bed in the middle of the night and arrested by local Virginia police. Their crime: violating the Racial Integrity Act of 1924, which forbid interracial marriage.
Almost fifty years after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned laws against interracial marriage in the case of Mildred and Richard Loving, their story is featured in a film released on Nov.
Mildred and Richard LovingBornMildred Mildred Delores JeterJuly 22, 1939 Central Point, Virginia, U.S. Richard Richard Perry LovingOctober 29, 1933 Central Point, Virginia, U.S.DiedMildred May 2, 2008 (aged 68) Milford, Virginia, U.S. Richard June 29, 1975 (aged 41) Caroline County, Virginia, U.S.4 more rows
What did the Sheriff say when Richard Loving points to his marriage license to prove that him and Mildred are legally married? "That's no good here."
Share: Sidney Clay Jeter went home to be with his heavenly father on Wednesday, May 5, 2010. He was surrounded by his loved ones. Sidney was born on January 27, 1957 to the late Richard Loving and Mildred Jeter Loving in Caroline County, Virginia.
Historical background. The first "interracial" marriage in what is today the United States was that of the woman today commonly known as Pocahontas, who married tobacco planter John Rolfe in 1614. The first ever law prohibiting interracial marriage was passed by the Maryland General Assembly in 1691.
The Lovings remained married until 1975 when Richard was tragically killed when a drunk driver slammed into his car. Mildred never remarried and died in 2008 at the age of 69. The legacy of the Lovings continues today. The AP reports that 17% of newlyweds in 2015 were interracial marriages.
With the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Lovings appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled unanimously that so-called “anti-miscegenation” statutes were unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. The decision is often cited as a watershed moment in the dismantling of “Jim Crow” race laws.
Following Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court made all anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional. In addition to this immediate effect, however, Loving also has a profound effect on same-sex marriage cases.
Virginia served as a part of the foundation for removing the last barrier to same-sex marriage in the United States. In 2013 Loving v. Virginia was cited as precedent in federal court cases on same-sex marriages. By 2015, the Supreme Court overturned bans on same-sex marriage in Obergefell v.
Supreme Court unanimously (9–0) struck down state antimiscegenation statutes in Virginia as unconstitutional under the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Mildred and Richard Loving, 1958.
At a hearing in a Virginia state court in January 1959, the Lovings pleaded guilty to having violated Section 20-58 of the Virginia state code, which prohibited a “white” person and a “colored” person from leaving the state to be married and returning to live as man and wife.
Having established residence in Washington, D.C., the Lovings filed suit in a Virginia state court in November 1963, seeking to overturn their convictions on the grounds that Sections 20-58 and 20-59 were inconsistent with the Fourteenth Amendment.
The case arose after Richard Loving, a white man, and Mildred Jeter, a woman of mixed African American and Native American ancestry, traveled from their residences in Central Point, Virginia, to Washington, D.C., to be married on June 2, 1958.
Naim (1965), the appeals court ruled that, despite the statutes’ use of racial classifications to define the criminal offenses in question, neither statute violated the guarantee of equal protection of the laws because the penalties they imposed applied equally to both “white” and “colored” persons.
On June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous 9–0 decision that overturned the Lovings' Virginia criminal convictions and struck down anti-miscegenation laws that forbade marriage between people of different races.
Board of Education in 1954 and Loving v. Virginia in 1967, respectively) were made about 13 years apart, much like the ruling holding bans on same-sex sexual activity unconstitutional and the eventual ruling holding bans on same-sex marriage unconstitutional ( Lawrence v. Texas in 2003 and Obergefell v.
In the United States, June 12, the date of the decision, has become known as Loving Day, an annual unofficial celebration of interracial marriages. In 2014, Mildred Loving was honored as one of the Library of Virginia 's " Virginia Women in History ". In 2017, the Virginia Department of Historic Resources dedicated a state historical marker, which tells the story of the Lovings, outside the Patrick Henry Building in Richmond – the former site of the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals.
The Lovings were charged under Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code, which prohibited interracial couples from being married out of state and then returning to Virginia, and Section 20-59, which classified miscegenation as a felony, punishable by a prison sentence of between one and five years.
Their marriage violated Virginia's Racial Integrity Act of 1924, which criminalized marriage between people classified as "white" and people classified as " colored ". The Lovings appealed their conviction to the Supreme Court of Virginia, which upheld it.
Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Beginning in 2013, it was cited as precedent in U.S.
In Georgia, for instance, the number of interracial marriages increased from 21 in 1967 to 115 in 1970. At the national level, 0.4% of marriages were interracial in 1960, 2.0% in 1980, 12% in 2013, and 16% in 2015, almost 50 years after Loving.
The appellants in Loving v. Virginia were Richard Perry Loving and his wife, Mildred Delores Jeter Loving. Born on October 29, 1933, in Central Point, Caroline County, Richard Loving was a white man who worked as a construction worker. Mildred Loving, born on July 22, 1939, also in Central Point, was part African American and part Indian.
Supreme Court unanimously struck down Virginia’s law prohibiting interracial marriages as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The appellants, Richard and Mildred Loving, of Caroline County, had married in Washington, D.C., in June 1958 and then returned to Virginia, where they were arrested. After pleading guilty, they were forced to leave the state. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed motions and appeals on their behalf beginning in 1963, and after the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals ruled against the Lovings in 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court heard their arguments. The case came after nearly 300 years of legislation in Virginia regulating interracial marriage and carefully defining which citizens could legally claim to be white. Two U.S. Supreme Court cases, Pace v. Alabama (1883) and Maynard v. Hill (1888), upheld the constitutionality of such laws. In 1924, the Act to Preserve Racial Integrity banned interracial marriage in Virginia while defining a white person as someone who had no discernible nonwhite ancestry. It was this law that the U.S. Supreme Court ruling said denied Virginians’ “fundamental freedom” to marry. Loving v. Virginia is a landmark case, both in the history of race relations in the United States and in the ongoing political and cultural dispute over the proper definition of marriage.
In October 1958 the circuit court of Caroline County issued an indictment indicating that their marriage was in violation of state law. On January 6, 1959, the Lovings pleaded not guilty and waived a jury trial; however, at the end of arguments, they changed their pleas to guilty.
Although it did not ban such unions outright, the law required that the white partner leave Virginia within three months. A 1705 revision of slave laws included a provision that no longer required the white partner to leave; instead, it levied a ten-pound fine and six months in prison. In 1848, the General Assembly increased that penalty to a maximum of twelve months in prison, again just for the white partner. The following year, the assembly declared that all marriages between whites and African Americans were “absolutely void.” In 1873, the punishment for such a marriage was established as a year in jail and a $100 fine for the white partner and a $200 fine for the person who officiated the wedding. (Half of the latter fine would benefit the person who alerted authorities to the crime.) Five years later, the assembly moved to punish not only the white partner in interracial marriages, but both partners, making them each liable to serve between two and five years in the state penitentiary.
On June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Richard and Mildred Loving, striking down Virginia’s law as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. In his opinion, Chief Justice Earl Warren described marriage as “one of the ‘basic civil rights of man,’ fundamental to our very existence and survival ….
Two U.S. Supreme Court cases, Pace v. Alabama (1883) and Maynard v. Hill (1888), upheld the constitutionality of such laws. In 1924, the Act to Preserve Racial Integrity banned interracial marriage in Virginia while defining a white person as someone who had no discernible nonwhite ancestry.
Mildred Loving, born on July 22, 1939, also in Central Point, was part African American and part Indian. (Later in her life she identified only as Indian.) After traveling to Washington, D.C., to obtain a legal marriage on June 2, 1958, they returned to Virginia, where mixed-race unions were against the law.
First, the unanimous decision serves as a good example of the unconstitutionality of a statute that is discriminatory on its face. Second, and more importantly, it classifies marriage as a fundamental right, and it set the stage for the Court’s decision in Obergefell v.
An interracial couple from Virginia, the Lovings, married in Washington D.C. to avoid the Virginia law , but later settled in Virginia. When caught living together in Virginia, the couple was convicted of violating the anti- miscegenation law. They were sentenced to either one year in prison, or to leave Virginia for 25 years.
They were sentenced to either one year in prison, or to leave Virginia for 25 years. The Lovings eventually filed suit both in Federal and State court to vacate the convictions and sentences. The State court affirmed the convictions.
Statement of the Facts: At the time of this case, Virginia had an anti-miscegenation law banning interracial marriages, similar to 16 other Southern states. Richard and Mildred Loving, a white man and African-American woman, married in Washington D.C. but returned to live in Virginia. When police found the couple in bed together ...
The Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, in its opinion, stated that the legitimate purpose of Virginia’s anti-miscegenation law was to “preserve the racial integrity of its citizens,” and to prevent “the corruption of blood,” “a mongrel breed of citizens,” and “the obliteration of racial pride.”.
The State’s argument that the law is “applied” equally to whites and African-Americans must be rejected because same-race couples are not punished criminally.
When police found the couple in bed together and their marriage license, they were arrested and charged under the anti-miscegenation law. After pleading guilty, they were sentenced to choose either one year in prison, or to move out of Virginia for 25 years.
Mildred Loving and her husband Richard Loving in 1965. Bernard Cohen, who successfully challenged a Virginia law banning interracial marriage and later went on to a successful political career as a Virginia state legislator, has died at age 86.
He graduated from the City College of New York in 1956 with an economics degree, and from Georgetown Law School four years later.
Interracial marriage was now legal in every state in the union. Rae Cohen, Bernard's wife of 61 years, remembers events that suggested not everyone in Alexandria was happy with her husband's role in the case. "There were a couple little incidents," she says. "We lived in a house that didn't have a garage.
Virginia was a landmark 1967 US Supreme Court decision in which the court ruled that laws banning interracial marriage were in violation of the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment. This ruling struck down prevailing state anti‐miscegenation laws that had long prohibited these forms ...
They were later indicted for violating Virginia’s anti‐miscegenation law, a felony offense, and sentenced to a year in jail. The trial judge then agreed to suspend the sentence so long as the Lovings left the state and did not return for at least 25 years.
Even so, it was not until 2000 that the last state, Alabama, formally rescinded its anti‐miscegenation statute. 50 years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Loving — Mildred and Richard Loving, who successfully sued the state of Virginia, forcing it to recognize their interracial marriage.
Virginia: The Freedom to Love Goes on Trial. Nov 6th, 2020. By the mid‐20 th century, forty‐one states had passed legislation that criminalized interracial relationships. The ban on what was then known as “miscegenation” was an overt expression of white supremacy. Richard and Mildred Loving and children.
Virginia continues to be an important legal precedent today. In the 2015 Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized gay marriage across the United States, Justice Anthony Kennedy cited the ruling in his court opinion stating: … the Court has long held the right to marry is protected by the Constitution.
The two were longtime friends who had fallen in love. In 1958, they exchanged wedding vows in Washington, D.C., where interracial marriage was considered legal. The couple then returned shortly thereafter to their home in the State of Virginia. 2.
For example, in 1883 the case of Pace v. Alabama went to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled that Alabama’s anti‐miscegenation law was constitutional because blacks and whites were being punished equally. In another 1888 case, the high court gave states the authority to become sole arbiters of their marriage laws.
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Beginning in 2013, it was cited as precedent in U.S. federal court decisions holding restrictions on same-sex marriage in the United States unconstitutional, including in the 2015 Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges.
Anti-miscegenation laws had been in place in certain states since colonial days. In the Reconstruction Era in 1865, the Black Codes across the seven states of the lower South made interracial marriage illegal. The new Republican legislatures in six states repealed the restrictive laws. By 1894, when the Democratic Party in the South returned to power, restrictions were reimposed.
The Lovings were charged under Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code, which prohibited interracial couples from being married out of state and then returning to Virginia, and Section 20-59, which classified miscegenation as a felony, punishable by a prison sentence of between one and five years.
On January 6, 1959, the Lovings pled guilty to "cohabiting as man and wife, against the peace an…
Despite the Supreme Court's decision, anti-miscegenation laws remained on the books in several states, although the decision had made them unenforceable. State judges in Alabama continued to enforce its anti-miscegenation statute until 1970, when the Nixon administration obtained a ruling from a U.S. District Court in United States v. Brittain. In 2000, Alabama became the last state to adapt its laws to the Supreme Court's decision, when 60% of voters endorsed a constitutional a…
• Works related to Loving v. Virginia at Wikisource
• Text of Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress OpenJurist Oyez (oral argument audio)
• A Groundbreaking Interracial Marriage; Loving v. Virginia at 40. ABC News interview with Mildre…