slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Perez v. Sharp Cal. S.Ct. 1948 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Perez v. Sharp Cal. S.Ct. 1948

play fullscreen
1 / 3
Download Presentation

Perez v. Sharp Cal. S.Ct. 1948 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

madeline
291 Views
Download Presentation

Perez v. Sharp Cal. S.Ct. 1948

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

    1. Perez v. Sharp (Cal. S.Ct. 1948) Andrea Perez and Sylvester Davis challenged California antimiscegenation law on religious freedom and equal protection grounds. Majority opinion (Traynor, J. + 3): This is part of the fundamental right to marry someone of their own choice. The ban on interracial marriage is unconstitutional. Dissent: (Schenck, J. + 2): Regulating marriage is the purview of the state. 10:41

    2. Quotes from Perez v. Sharp The right to marry is as fundamental as the right to send ones child to a particular school or the right to have offspring. Marriage and procreation are fundamnetal to the very existence and survival of the race [T]he right to marry is the right to join in marriage with the person of ones choice at Page 2. 10:41

    3. Loving v. Virginia (1967) Mildred and Richard Loving married 1958 in D.C. but were unable to live in Virginia because of its antimiscegenation law. Does the law violate Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the 14th Amend? Yes and Yes. The law is an invalid racial classification meant to further White Supremacy and invalid burden on the fundamental right to marry. 10:41