2. Issues of Loving V. Virginia

"This case presents a constitutional question never addressed by this Court: whether a statutory scheme adopted by the State of Virginia to prevent marriages between persons solely on the basis of racial classifications violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment" (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0388_0001_ZO.html)

The above statement was issued within the introduction of one of the closing statements to Loving v. Virginia. It's relevance to the case as a whole is perfectly clear, as it distinguishes the exact issue which drove the case into the Supreme Court. The Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause states the following:

"Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. " (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/11.html#8)

The bolded statement is where the constitutionality of Virginia's ban on interracial marriage surfaces. The Lovings were citizens of the United States, and, likewise, citizens of the State of Virginia. Under the Fourteenth Amendment, it was proposed that banning their marriage and relationship would be a violation of their right to due process, as well as equal protection under the laws of the country and state. On the flip side, the state of Virginia argued that the ban on interracial marriage was constitutional, because it excluded whites from marrying people of color, as well as excluded people of color from marrying whites. The law did not apply to interracil marriages between 'people of color' - such as a latino woman and an Asian man.