Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Lovings, still supported by the ACLU, appealed the state supreme court's decision to the Supreme Court of the United States, where Virginia was represented by Robert McIlwaine of the state's attorney general's office. The Supreme Court agreed on December 12, 1966, to accept the case for final review.
The Lovings and ACLU appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Lovings did not attend the oral arguments in Washington, but their lawyer, Bernard S. Cohen, conveyed a message from Richard Loving to the court: "[T]ell the Court I love my wife, and it is just unfair that I can't live with her in Virginia." [21] The case, Loving v.
The U.S. Supreme Court case of Obergefell v. Hodges is not the culmination of one lawsuit. [8] Ultimately, it is the consolidation of six lower-court cases, originally representing sixteen same-sex couples, seven of their children, a widower, an adoption agency, and a funeral director. Those cases came from Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and ...
Obergefell also spoke out in 2022 when another landmark Supreme Court case, Roe v. Wade, was overturned to allow states to make abortion illegal. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a ...
This case was part of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's work with the ACLU Women's Rights Project. [2]An Oklahoma statute prohibiting the sale of "nonintoxicating" 3.2% beer to males under the age of 21 but allowed females over the age of 18 was challenged as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause in the District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma in 1971.
The railroad could refuse service to passengers who refused to comply, and the Supreme Court ruled this did not infringe upon the 13th and 14th amendments. The "separate but equal" doctrine applied in theory to all public facilities: not only railroad cars but schools, medical facilities, theaters, restaurants, restrooms, and drinking fountains.
The ruling reversed a lower court decision, which the justices said swept too broadly into areas like peaceful but disruptive conduct, and returned the case to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Supreme Court has laid out three tiers of scrutiny in such debates over equal protection of the law: “strict scrutiny,” the toughest review, for any government classification based on race ...