The Right To Love

The sheriff and his men came about 2 a.m. Richard Loving heard the knocking, but before he could get out of bed, the officers broke through the door and burst into the bedroom. Later, Mildred Loving recalled the sudden panic, the flashlights in her face.

“They asked Richard who [I was]. I said, ‘I’m his wife.’ The sheriff said, ‘Not around here you’re not.’”

The place was rural Caroline County, Virginia, in July 1958. Richard, who was white, and Mildred, who was black and Native American, had committed a crime. They had violated Virginia’s Racial Integrity Act, which made it “unlawful for any white person in this State to marry [anyone except] a white person.”

For their offense, the Lovings were nearly imprisoned, then banished from Virginia. But they fought back in court. In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in their favor, erasing 16 state laws that banned interracial marriage. Nearly 50 years later, Loving v. Virginia continues to help protect the right of Americans to marry anyone they want.

The sheriff and his men came about 2 a.m. Richard Loving heard the knocking. Before he could get out of bed, the officers broke through the door and burst into the bedroom. Later, Mildred Loving recalled the sudden panic. She remembered the flashlights in her face. “They asked Richard who [I was]. I said, ‘I’m his wife.’ The sheriff said, ‘Not around here you’re not.’”

It was July 1958. The place was rural Caroline County, Virginia. Richard was white. Mildred was black and Native American. They had committed a crime by violating Virginia’s Racial Integrity Act. The law made it “unlawful for any white person in this State to marry [anyone except] a white person.”

For their offense, the Lovings were nearly imprisoned. But they fought back in court. In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in their favor. This ruling erased 16 state laws that banned interracial marriage. Nearly 50 years later, Loving v. Virginia continues to help protect the right of Americans to marry anyone they want.

By the time the Lovings were arrested, nearly a century had passed since the 14th Amendment to the Constitution (1868) guaranteed “equal protection of 

the laws” to all citizens regardless of race. Yet blacks still faced many barriers to equality in the U.S. 

This was especially true in the former slaveholding states of the South. There, laws and practices protected the dominance and “racial purity” of whites. For example, even after the Supreme Court outlawed racially segregated public schools in 1954 with Brown v. Board of Education, many of the South’s schools still were not integrated. 

Yet in places like Caroline County, the lives of blacks and whites were intertwined. “[My parents] grew up within three or four miles of each other,” Richard and Mildred’s daughter, Peggy Loving, said in a 2011 documentary about the case. Mildred’s brothers played music at parties Richard attended. Black and white families routinely helped each other harvest their crops. In that small world, it wasn’t so incredible that Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving would meet and fall in love.

“People had been mixing all the time, so I didn’t know any different,” Mildred would later say. “I didn’t know there was a law against it.”

Even so, Richard and Mildred knew some people in their community still felt threatened by racial mixing. When they wed on June 2, 1958, they did it quietly in Washington, D.C. About five weeks later, they were arrested back home.

By the time the Lovings were arrested, nearly a century had passed since the 14th Amendment to the Constitution was passed. That 1868 amendment guaranteed “equal protection of the laws” to all citizens regardless of race. Yet blacks still faced many barriers to equality in the U.S.

This was especially true in the former slaveholding states of the South. There, laws and practices protected the dominance of whites. For example, the Supreme Court outlawed racially segregated public schools in 1954. That case was called Brown v. Board of Education. But even after that ruling, many of the South’s schools still were not integrated.

Yet in places like Caroline County, the lives of blacks and whites were intertwined. “[My parents] grew up within three or four miles of each other,” Peggy Loving said in a 2011 documentary about the case. She is Richard and Mildred’s daughter. Mildred’s brothers played music at parties Richard attended. Black and white families routinely helped each other harvest their crops. In that small world, it wasn’t so incredible that Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving would meet and fall in love.

“People had been mixing all the time, so I didn’t know any different,” Mildred would later say. “I didn’t know there was a law against it.”

Even so, Richard and Mildred knew some people in their community still felt threatened by racial mixing. They wed quietly on June 2, 1958, in Washington, D.C. About five weeks later, they were arrested back home.

Brought before Judge Leon Bazile on January 6, 1959, the Lovings feared being convicted and thrown in prison. So they pleaded guilty in exchange for a one-year sentence.

Bazile then suspended the sentence, meaning that the Lovings wouldn’t have to go to prison, but only if they agreed to his terms: They would have to leave Virginia for 25 years. If they returned together, they’d have to do time.

Mildred and Richard decided to leave Virginia. They moved to Washington, D.C., but life was difficult there. They struggled to adjust to the city. Often, they would sneak back to Virginia. (All three of their children were born during visits.)

The Lovings were brought before Judge Leon Bazile on January 6, 1959. They feared being thrown in prison. So they pleaded guilty in exchange for a one-year sentence.

But Bazile suspended the sentence. This meant that the Lovings wouldn’t have to go to prison, but only if they agreed to his terms: They would have to leave Virginia for 25 years. If they returned together, they’d have to do time.

Mildred and Richard decided to leave Virginia. They moved to Washington, D.C. Life was difficult there. They struggled to adjust to the city. Often, they would sneak back to Virginia. (All three of their children were born during visits.)

Meanwhile, the world was changing. The civil rights movement and protests against racial segregation, many led by Martin Luther King Jr., filled the news. In early 1963, with that sense of change in the air, Mildred wrote to Attorney General Robert Kennedy explaining their situation. Kennedy referred them to the American Civil Liberties Union, an organization that represents clients fighting civil rights cases in court. There, Mildred’s letter reached the desk of a young lawyer named Bernard Cohen. 

Cohen immediately understood the challenges of the case. He knew it would likely take years to resolve, and might well go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Cohen also believed the chances of winning were high—and made better by the plaintiffs ’ last name. “It was a very good omen,” he said.

Meanwhile, the world was changing. The civil rights movement and protests against racial segregation filled the news. Many of those protests were led by Martin Luther King Jr.

In early 1963, Mildred felt that sense of change in the air. She wrote to Attorney General Robert Kennedy explaining their situation. Kennedy referred them to the American Civil Liberties Union. This is an organization that represents clients fighting civil rights cases in court. There, Mildred’s letter reached the desk of a young lawyer named Bernard Cohen.

Cohen immediately understood the challenges of the case. He knew it would likely take years to resolve. It might well go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, he thought.

But Cohen believed the chances of winning were high. He called the plaintiffs ’ last name “a very good omen.” 

First, Cohen appealed to Judge Bazile to reconsider the case. Bazile’s decision, in January 1965, showed them just what they were up against.

“Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow . . . and red, and he placed them on separate continents,” Bazile stated. “The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”

Cohen and his law partner appealed the case through state and federal courts. Finally, in April 1967, Loving v. Virginia reached the U.S. Supreme Court. (See “The Supreme Court and the Law.”) The night before the lawyers made their arguments, Cohen asked Richard if there was anything he wanted the justices of the Supreme Court to know. 

“Tell the Court I love my wife, and it is just unfair that I can’t live with her in Virginia,” Richard said.

Two months later, on June 12, the Court unanimously backed the Lovings, ruling that Virginia’s law violated the 14th Amendment. Said Chief Justice Earl Warren: “Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry . . . a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.”

Talking to a reporter that day, Cohen emphasized the importance of the ruling for the country. “We hope we have put to rest the last [traces] of racial discrimination that were supported by the law in Virginia and all over the country.”

For the Lovings, things were simpler. “I feel free now,” Richard said.

First, Cohen appealed to Judge Bazile to reconsider the case. Bazile’s January 1965 decision showed them just what they were up against.

“Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow . . . and red, and he placed them on separate continents,” Bazile stated. “The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”

Cohen and his law partner appealed the case through state and federal courts. Finally, in April 1967, Loving v. Virginia reached the U.S. Supreme Court. The night before the lawyers made their arguments, Cohen asked Richard if there was anything he wanted the justices of the Supreme Court to know.

“Tell the Court I love my wife, and it is just unfair that I can’t live with her in Virginia,” Richard said.

On June 12, the Court unanimously backed the Lovings. They ruled that Virginia’s law violated the 14th Amendment. Said Chief Justice Earl Warren: “Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry . . . a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.”

Talking to a reporter that day, Cohen emphasized the importance of the ruling for the country. “We hope we have put to rest the last [traces] of racial discrimination that were supported by the law in Virginia and all over the country.”

For the Lovings, things were simpler. “I feel free now,” Richard said.  

The decision had an immediate effect, allowing interracial couples to get married in any state. But social attitudes still had catching up to do. According to a 1968 Gallup poll, 73 percent of Americans disapproved of mixed-race marriage.

Yet the case helped bring about profound changes in society. By 2013, 87 percent of Americans approved of interracial marriage. That same year, the Pew Research Center reported, a record high of 12 percent of American newlyweds were interracial couples. 

Then, in 2015, the Supreme Court returned to the case in a decision that struck down state laws against same-sex marriage. Justice Anthony Kennedy cited Loving to insist that marrying whomever one chooses was one of the “fundamental liberties” protected by the Constitution.

The impact of the case is perhaps best illustrated by the generations of people who have been able to marry over the past 50 years. 

“So many children and couples . . . are products of that ruling,” says Nancy Buirski, director of the documentary The Loving Story. The decision “affects them directly and gives them a status in society that they wouldn’t have had [otherwise].”

In this way, by fighting for their marriage, the Lovings made history. As Peggy Loving has said of her parents: 

“I believe that’s what they were put here on Earth to do.”

The decision had an immediate effect. It allowed interracial couples to get married in any state. But social attitudes still had catching up to do. According to a 1968 Gallup poll, 73 percent of Americans disapproved of mixed-race marriage.

Yet the case helped bring about profound changes in society. By 2013, 87 percent of Americans approved of interracial marriage. That same year, the Pew Research
Center reported that 12 percent of American newlyweds were interracial couples. That was a record high.

Then, in 2015, the Supreme Court returned to the case in a decision that struck down state laws against same-sex marriage. Justice Anthony Kennedy cited Loving to insist that marrying whomever one chooses was one of the “fundamental liberties” protected by the Constitution.

The impact of the case is perhaps best illustrated by the generations of people who have been able to marry over the past 50 years.

“So many children and couples . . . are products of that ruling,” says Nancy Buirski. She is the director of the documentary The Loving Story. The decision “affects them directly and gives them a status in society that they wouldn’t have had [otherwise].”

In this way, the Lovings made history by fighting for their marriage. As Peggy Loving has said of her parents: “I believe that’s what they were put here on Earth to do.”