1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
muminat
3 years ago
15

In the supreme court case loving v virginia a law that banned interracial marriage was declared unconstitutional.

History
2 answers:
nika2105 [10]3 years ago
6 0
A. Ideologies of the justices and B. evolving attitudes.
kari74 [83]3 years ago
4 0

In the Supreme Court case Loving v. Virginia a law that banned interracial marriage was declared unconstitutional. Judicial interpretations changed as a result of change in the ideologies of the justices, and citizen petitions of equality between white and black people.

The case Loving v, Virginia was a judicial case on civil rights, brought before the Supreme Court of the United States, which in its judgment established jurisprudence invalidating the laws that prohibited interracial marriage in the United States.

In the case, Mildred Loving, a black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, had been sentenced to one year in jail in Virginia for marrying. Their marriage violated the anti-miscegenation laws of the State, the Racial Integrity Act of 1924, which prohibited all marriage between persons classified as "white" with persons classified as "colored". The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that such a ban was unconstitutional, reversing the ruling in Pace v. Alabama (1883) and ending all legal restrictions on marriage based on race in the country.

The ruling caused an increase in interracial marriages in the United States and is commemorated annually every June 12 with the Loving Day.

You might be interested in
Which of the following best describes the main effect of the draft between 1917 and 1919?
Amanda [17]

It had drafted men ages 18 to 45 years old.  This resulted in a total of 2 million Americans volunteering for the War.  It increased the size of the U.S. army.  This was due to the patriot fervor that griped the nation to fight during the First World War.

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
I'm only a child and I don't have all the solutions, but I want you to realise, neither do you!
Luden [163]

I THINK THE ANSWER IS C

3 0
3 years ago
How are yall feeling about Amerigo vespucci
harina [27]
He founded America , and rightfully named after him . So feeling pretty good
3 0
3 years ago
Why was Andrew Jackson a president of contradictions?
drek231 [11]

Answer:

Jackson was elected the seventh president of the United States in 1828. Known as the "people's president," Jackson destroyed the Second Bank of the United States, founded the Democratic Party, supported individual liberty and instituted policies that resulted in the forced migration of Native Americans.

Explanation:

Before being elected to the presidency, Jackson gained fame as a general in the United States Army and served in both houses of the U.S. Congress. As president, Jackson sought to advance the rights of the "common man" against a "corrupt aristocracy" and to preserve the Union.

4 0
3 years ago
Do you agree or disagree w/ Cortes decision to burn the ships? Explain
Nataliya [291]

Hernan Cortes (1485-1547) was a Spanish colonizer and conqueror, who leaded the conquest of the Mexican territories, that started in 1519 with the occupation of Veracruz. The tales about the sacking of the Mexican capital, Tenochtitlan, are still legendary nowadays.

After the takeover of Veracruz, Cortes gave the order of sinking his own ships (it was thought they were burnt, but nowadays that hypothesis is being questioned). Anyway, he destroyed his ships on purpouse to force his men to go forward and conquer the New World, both in the militar and spiritual (goal of spreading the Christian religion) dimensions.

  • Agreement with his decision: of course it is an incredibly effective manner of ensuring that his men would be motivated to conquer the territory, mainly because they did not have an alternative choice. They had to become rulers there or be lost in the middle of unknown lands. It can be claimed how the ultimate goal justifies the means.
  • Disagreement with the decision: it can be argued how unethical is that he prevented his men from deciding if they wanted to participate or not on the mission. He eliminated the choice.
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • A comic book telling the story of the American Revolution.
    5·1 answer
  • Who was the main author of the declaration of independence
    14·1 answer
  • Who did many Americans expect to put the slavery issue to an end?
    5·1 answer
  • How did imperialism benefit strong nations
    7·1 answer
  • Why were African-American still not free by 1963
    14·1 answer
  • The “mound builders” who lived east of the Mississippi River were the ____ and the ____.
    12·1 answer
  • A challenge that modern presidents face is leading their political party. issuing executive orders. recognizing foreign nations.
    6·2 answers
  • What are two reasons that Israel entered into an alliance with Britain and France in the Suez War of 1956?
    9·1 answer
  • Which events were the most brutal massacres in human history?.
    13·1 answer
  • Who disagreed with
    6·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!