Document Bank of Virginia
Search using this query type:

Search only these record types:


Advanced Search (Items only)

To search by SOL, click on the 3 dots to the right of the search bar, select Exact Match in the drop down menu, and type the specific SOL in the search window.

The Crime of Being Married, Life Magazine, March 18, 1966

CONTENT WARNING

Materials in the Library of Virginia’s collections contain historical terms, phrases, and images that are offensive to modern readers. These include demeaning and dehumanizing references to race, ethnicity, and nationality; enslaved or free status; physical and mental ability; and gender and sexual orientation. 

Context

The Loving v. Virginia case ended a long history of banning marriage between white and Black Virginians dating back to the 17th century. In 1878 the General Assembly enacted a law punishing both parties in an interracial marriage with prison sentences in the state penitentiary (previously only the white partner in an interracial marriage had been subject to prosecution). The Racial Integrity Act of 1924 further restricted interracial marriage by making it illegal for a white person to marry anyone not classified as white. The General Assembly also continued to narrow racial classifications of Black, Indian, and white Virginians early in the 20th century, culminating in a 1930 amendment to the Racial Integrity Act declaring that a person "in whom there is ascertainable any negro blood" was deemed "a colored person." 

In 1958, Caroline County residents Richard Loving, a white man, and Mildred Jeter, a multi-racial woman, traveled to Washington, D.C., to get married in violation of Virginia law. They were arrested a few months after returning home. A local judge gave them a 25-year suspended sentence provided they leave the state immediately. They could return to visit family only if they traveled separately and were not in the Commonwealth at the same time. After living in Washington for five years, they decided they wanted to move back home. While visiting family, the couple was arrested again and released on bail. They took action to challenge the Racial Integrity Act on Constitutional grounds. Mildred Loving wrote a letter to the United States Attorney General Robert Kennedy, asking for his help. He referred Mildred Loving to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). With the help of ACLU attorney Bernard Cohen and civil rights lawyer Philip Hirschkop, the Lovings filed a suit to overturn their conviction and sentence. Denied at the county court and the state Supreme Court, they appealed the case to the United States Supreme Court, where Cohen argued that the Racial Integrity Act violated the Lovings’ rights to due process as articulated by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. On June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court ruled in unanimously in favor of the Lovings, ending decades of Virginia’s discriminatory laws and overturning bans on interracial marriage across the country.

This article published in Life Magazine on March 18, 1966, explained the Lovings’ legal situation following the Virginia Supreme Court decision to uphold the 1924 Racial Integrity Act. Life Magazine was a national publication and brought the issue of interracial marriage bans in Virginia to the attention of people across the country.

Citation: The Crime of Being Married, Life Magazine, March 18, 1966, Library of Virginia.

Related Document Bank Entries:
Application for Marriage License Under the Racial Integrity Act, 1924
Virginia Health Bulletin: The New Virginia Law To Preserve Racial Integrity, March 1924

Learn more about "Racial Integrity Laws" online at Encyclopedia Virginia. 

For more information on the effects of the racial integrity laws on Virginia Indian and Black citizens, see Arica Coleman, That the Blood Stay Pure: African Americans, Native Americans, and the Predicament of Race in Virginia (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2013).

Standards

Social Studies: USII.1, USII.4, USII.9, VUS.1, VUS.14, GOVT.1, GOVT.10

Suggested Questions

Preview Activity

Look at It: Look at the headlines and images. What do you think is the tone the article is taking, and why?

Post Activities

Looking at Language: Read the article. How are the Lovings portrayed? How does the reporter characterize their dilemma? If the reporter was picking a side, what side do you think they would be on, based on the language used in this first page?

Dig Deeper: Look at the 1924 Health Bulletin here: https://edu.lva.virginia.gov/dbva/items/show/226
Loving v. Virginia overturned the 1924 law. Why do you think it took so much effort to overturn this law? Why did the Supreme Court have to get involved? What do you think about Virginia lawmakers’ and officials’ attitudes toward interracial marriage, and why? How is the right to marry whomever you want still an issue today, and why?