Miscegenation Statute in the US



Miscegenation Statute in the US

Introduction

Miscegenation is the intermixing of ethnicities, racial groups and religions. Miscegenation generally relates to the production of off springs by two people who are racially or religiously different from one another. The word miscegenation is made up of two Latin words, "misce" meaning to mix, and “genus" meaning race. It is customarily used and taken in the context of the black men's craving and desires for the white women, and the racist attitude of the white men. The mixing of races occurred for the first time under the system of slavery. The incidents occurred under the influence and threat of power and violence through the acts of rape and domination (Woodson, 1918). Anti miscegenation laws have been a part of the American Law before the United States. These laws were passed by individual states to stop people from marrying out of their races. They prohibited interracial sex and interracial marriages. There were many states including Oklahoma which banned marriage between a non African and an African. There were many amendments made in the anti-miscegenation laws in the years 1871, 1912-1913 and 1928. However, a law against racially mixed marriages was never enacted on a national scale. Most of the states in the United States had enacted the anti-miscegenation laws till the year 1948. However, in 1967, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled out that the anti miscegenation laws were in no way under constitution. This ruling made the anti miscegenation laws ineffective in all states. The two cases about anti miscegenation discussed in the assignment will be Perez v. Sharp (1948) and the Loving v. Virginia (1967).

Discussion

Perez vs. Sharp - End to Miscegenation Laws in California

In 1948, Sylvester Davis, an African American man, and Andrea Perez, a Mexican American woman filed a lawsuit against the County Clerk of Los Angeles named W.G. Sharp. The couple met in the Defense Industry in the Los Angeles. They sought a marriage license from the office of the County Clerk. They were, however, denied a marriage license because of the fact that Davis was a Negro and Perez was a white woman. Under the law of California and the Civil Code Section 60, marriages between the Mongolians, Negroes, mulattoes or members of the Malay race, with a white person was void and illegal. The Section 60 of the constitution also stated that no marriage license is to be issued to such a couple. Interracial marriage was banned in under the anti miscegenation laws of the United States since the year 1850. Whites were not allowed to marry anybody who did not belong to their race (Kennedy, 2003).

The opinion of the court was that marriage was a fundamental right of the people, and they should not be stopped or restricted to get married on prejudicial grounds. The judges opinionated that restrictions on marriage due to discrimination and prejudice violated the constitutional requirements of equal protection of laws and due ...