Loving v. Virginia
E19239
Loving v. Virginia is a landmark 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down state laws banning interracial marriage, affirming marriage as a fundamental right under the Fourteenth Amendment.
All labels observed (4)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Loving v. Virginia canonical | 12 |
| Loving v. Virginia decision | 1 |
| Loving v. Virginia invalidated state laws prohibiting interracial marriage | 1 |
| Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T126048 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Loving v. Virginia Context triple: [Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, keyCase, Loving v. Virginia]
-
A.
Reed v. Reed
Reed v. Reed is a landmark 1971 U.S. Supreme Court case that for the first time struck down a law for discriminating on the basis of sex under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
B.
Obergefell v. Hodges
Obergefell v. Hodges is the landmark 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide by ruling that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.
-
C.
Craig v. Boren
Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
D.
Browder v. Gayle
Browder v. Gayle was the landmark 1956 federal court case that declared bus segregation in Montgomery, Alabama unconstitutional, effectively ending the Montgomery bus boycott and striking a major blow against Jim Crow laws.
-
E.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Loving v. Virginia Target entity description: Loving v. Virginia is a landmark 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down state laws banning interracial marriage, affirming marriage as a fundamental right under the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
A.
Reed v. Reed
Reed v. Reed is a landmark 1971 U.S. Supreme Court case that for the first time struck down a law for discriminating on the basis of sex under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
B.
Obergefell v. Hodges
Obergefell v. Hodges is the landmark 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide by ruling that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.
-
C.
Craig v. Boren
Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
D.
Browder v. Gayle
Browder v. Gayle was the landmark 1956 federal court case that declared bus segregation in Montgomery, Alabama unconstitutional, effectively ending the Montgomery bus boycott and striking a major blow against Jim Crow laws.
-
E.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Fourteenth Amendment case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ civil rights case ⓘ constitutional law case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
civil rights law
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ family law ⓘ |
| arguedDate |
1967-04-10
ⓘ
1967-04-11 ⓘ |
| citation | 388 U.S. 1 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
Due Process Clause
ⓘ
Equal Protection Clause ⓘ Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| criminalChargeInOriginatingCase | violation of Virginia’s ban on interracial marriage ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1967-06-12 ⓘ |
| decisionType | unanimous decision ⓘ |
| fullName |
Loving v. Virginia
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)
|
| holding |
marriage is a fundamental right under the Due Process Clause
ⓘ
racial classifications in marriage laws violate the Equal Protection Clause ⓘ state laws banning interracial marriage are unconstitutional ⓘ |
| impact |
expanded constitutional protection for marriage as a fundamental right
ⓘ
invalidated anti-miscegenation laws in all U.S. states ⓘ strengthened strict scrutiny for racial classifications ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| legalIssue |
Due Process Clause
ⓘ
surface form:
Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
Equal Protection Clause ⓘ
surface form:
Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
constitutionality of state bans on interracial marriage ⓘ |
| locationOfOriginatingCase | Caroline County, Virginia ⓘ |
| opinionAuthor | Earl Warren ⓘ |
| opinionType | majority opinion ⓘ |
| overturnedLaw |
Virginia Racial Integrity Act of 1924
ⓘ
Virginia statutes prohibiting interracial marriage ⓘ |
| petitioner |
Mildred Loving
ⓘ
Richard Loving ⓘ |
| precedentFor | cases involving the fundamental right to marry ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Brown v. Board of Education
ⓘ
Obergefell v. Hodges ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
civil rights movement
ⓘ
marriage equality ⓘ |
| remedy |
prohibited states from enforcing bans on interracial marriage
ⓘ
reversed criminal convictions of the Lovings ⓘ |
| respondent |
Virginia
ⓘ
surface form:
Commonwealth of Virginia
|
| subjectMatter |
anti-miscegenation laws
ⓘ
fundamental right to marry ⓘ interracial marriage ⓘ |
| vote | 9-0 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1967 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Loving v. Virginia Description of subject: Loving v. Virginia is a landmark 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down state laws banning interracial marriage, affirming marriage as a fundamental right under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Referenced by (15)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.