In Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that Virginia’s law banning marriage between persons of different races was unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment. What attitude led many to disagree with this decision?Group of answer choicesPeople should partner up with similar people and respect endogamy.People should be required to marry within the same economic class.People should partner up with people who are different than themselves.People should be required to marry only one person for life.

“The fact that Virginia prohibits only interracial marriages involving white persons demonstrates that the racial classifications must stand on their own justification, as measures designed to maintain White Supremacy. We have consistently denied the constitutionality of measures which restrict the rights of citizens on account of race. There can be no doubt that restricting the freedom to marry solely because of racial classifications violates the central meaning of the Equal Protection Clause.“These statutes also deprive the Lovings of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.“Marriage is one of the ‘basic civil rights of man,’ fundamental to our very existence and survival. . . . To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes . . . is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State.”United States Supreme Court, ruling in Loving v. Virginia, 1967QuestionThe ruling described in the excerpt is most similar to which of the following earlier political changes?ResponsesThe enactment of universal voting rights for women during the Progressive EraThe enactment of universal voting rights for women during the Progressive EraCourt rulings during the Gilded Age that “separate but equal” public facilities were constitutionalCourt rulings during the Gilded Age that “separate but equal” public facilities were constitutionalThe extension of citizenship rights to formerly enslaved people following the Civil WarThe extension of citizenship rights to formerly enslaved people following the Civil WarThe gradual shift of African American support to the Democratic Party du

Question 26 of 30Which of the following legalized marriage in the entire United States between men and women of different races?A.The Mendez v. Westminster decisionB.The Fourteenth AmendmentC.The Loving v. Virginia decisionD.The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo

How did the Supreme Court contribute to the extension of equal rights to marginalized groups in the 21st century?A.By removing limitations on affirmative action programs at universitiesB.By protecting same-sex marriages under the equal protection clauseC.By granting noncitizens living in the United States equal protection under the lawD.By guaranteeing women and men equal pay for equal work

The state constitution in one state guaranteed the right to marry to same-sex and opposite-sex couples alike. A political group got a proposition on the ballot, and a majority of the people voted to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry. The proposition did not affect any of the other rights that same-sex couples may have possessed from existing state law.Persons affected sued the state government for unconstitutionally taking away the rights that they had and doing it for no legitimate purpose, in violation of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Will the court grant the requests of the lawsuit and declare the proposition void and reinstate the rights of same-sex couples to marry?Yes, under the due process clause no compelling state interest justifies denying same-sex couples the fundamental right to marry.Yes, because under the Fourth Amendment it would be an illegal interference against the right of privacy guaranteed to everyone.No, because the people voted to take a provision out of the existing constitution and when that is done by public vote it cannot be altered.No, because the ballot proposition was properly placed on the ballot and all statutory procedures were followed, thus precluding the courts from taking a

The fundamental right to marry