Thread replies: 15
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4
Anonymous
Recordings of Loving v. Virginia 2017-06-12 10:20:20 Post No. 129571493
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Recordings of Loving v. Virginia 2017-06-12 10:20:20 Post No. 129571493
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: Screen Shot 2017-06-12 at 6.17.48 AM.png (1MB, 1552x1340px) Image search:
[Google]
1MB, 1552x1340px
http://www.npr.org/2017/06/12/532123349/illicit-cohabitation-listen-to-6-stunning-moments-from-loving-v-virginia
The Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Loving v. Virginia declared unconstitutional a Virginia law prohibiting mixed-race marriage. The ruling also legalized interracial marriage in every state.
Bernard Cohen and Phillip Hirschkop, two young ACLU lawyers at the time, took the case of the Lovings — a black and Native American woman named Mildred and Richard Loving, her white husband — all the way to the High Court.
Phil Hirschkop was just three years out of law school when he defended the Loving case before the Supreme Court.
1. Cohen and Hirschkop asked the Court to look closely at whether the Virginia law violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. If the Framers had intended to exclude anti-miscegenation status in the Fourteenth Amendment, which assures equal protection under the law, they argued that it would have been easy for them to write a phrase excluding interracial marriage, but they didn't Cohen argued:
"The language was broad, the language was sweeping. The language meant to include equal protection for Negroes that was at the very heart of it and that equal protection included the right to marry as any other human being had the right to marry subject to only the same limitations."
>>
>>129571493
bump
>>
>>129571493
Supreme Court was not meant to have judicial review
No one can argue against this
Supreme Court gave itself this power in a court case judged by itself
They have subverted democracy and are behind most of the bad things that happened to America
Separation of powers my ass
>>
File: IMG_0335.jpg (152KB, 1920x1080px) Image search:
[Google]
152KB, 1920x1080px
>>129571493
>Bernard Cohen and Phillip Hirschkop, two young ACLU lawyers at the time
>>
>>129571493
>((( Bernard Cohen))) and ((( Phillip Hirschkop)))
>>
>>129571493
Daily reminder that Jews fought for interracial marriage but bar it in their religious rites.
>>
>>129578702
I was just about to say this and also
>>129579011
this.
/pol/ is always right
>>
I never thought I'd see the day that autists on /pol/ would throw a fit over this fucking case. Why don't you get more mad at the owners in the south who didn't castrate their slaves like the Ottomans did.
>>
File: eJwVzFEOgyAMgOG7cABoKdLWyxiiBl1UiLCnZXefe_3z5f-Y932Y0Wy91zY6t-xtLvdiWy93yqvNpeRjTXVvdi6nS72neTvXqzdHgAhMIBFFgkekf2Jl1OCJhQEUHUYBBqXpsYHFiwwaEUiniANpiBxUnwUpEk-XfdVsvj-5qyon.jpg (94KB, 553x573px) Image search:
[Google]
94KB, 553x573px
>>129571493
bernard (((cohen)))
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMGZtkMS3sQ
>>
>>129571493
>If the Framers had intended to exclude anti-miscegenation status in the Fourteenth Amendment, which assures equal protection under the law, they argued that it would have been easy for them to write a phrase excluding interracial marriage, but they didn't Cohen argued:
>"The language was broad, the language was sweeping. The language meant to include equal protection for Negroes that was at the very heart of it and that equal protection included the right to marry as any other human being had the right to marry subject to only the same limitations."
That's not even an argument.
>>
>>129571493
Kikes are pro miscegenation for non kikes. Water is wet.
>>
>>129579698
>Leon M. Bazile
>Leon Imbecile
>>
>>129573939
True
>>
Loving v Virginia is literally unconstitutonal by taking away the states delegated power to control laws of marriage.
Thread posts: 15
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4