Document Type
Working Paper
Repository Date
2012
Keywords
due process, legal history, state and local government law, constitutional law, sexuality and the law, law and society, jurisprudence
Subject Categories
Constitutional Law | Jurisprudence | Law | Law and Society | Legal History | Sexuality and the Law | State and Local Government Law
Abstract
This article makes an originalist argument in defense of the Supreme Court's holding in Loving v. Virginia that antimiscegenation laws are unconstitutional. This article builds on past work by Professor Michael McConnell defending Brown v. Board of Education on originalist grounds and by Professor Calabresi defending strict scrutiny for gender classifications on originalist grounds. Professor Calabresi's work in this area was defended and praise recently by Slate magazine online. The article shows that Loving v. Virginia is defensible using the public meaning originalism advocated for by Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. This article shows that the issue in Loving is a classic conflict between text and legislative history.
Repository Citation
Calabresi, Steven G. and Matthews, Andrea, "Originalism and Loving v. Virginia" (2012). Faculty Working Papers. 206.
https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/facultyworkingpapers/206
Included in
Constitutional Law Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Law and Society Commons, Legal History Commons, Sexuality and the Law Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons
