| Element 要素 | English Description 英文描述 | Chinese Description 中文描述 |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of Case 案件性质 |
A constitutional challenge to Virginia's statutory scheme that prohibited and criminalized marriage between individuals solely on the basis of race. | 对弗吉尼亚州禁止并刑事处罚仅基于种族的通婚的法律体系提出的合宪性挑战。 |
| Concise Rule of Law 简明法律规则 |
Statutes that prohibit marriage solely on the basis of racial classifications violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. | 禁止仅基于种族分类的通婚的法律，违反了第十四修正案的平等保护条款和正当程序条款。 |
| Facts 案件事实 |
In 1958, Mildred Jeter (a Negro woman) and Richard Loving (a white man), Virginia residents, were lawfully married in Washington, D.C. They returned to Virginia and were convicted under Virginia's anti-miscegenation laws. | 1958年，弗吉尼亚州居民米尔德丽德·杰特（黑人女性）和理查德·洛文（白人男性）在华盛顿特区合法结婚。他们返回弗吉尼亚州后因违反该州反异族通婚法而被定罪。 |
| Issue 争议焦点 |
Does a statutory scheme that prohibits marriage solely on the basis of racial classifications violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment? | 禁止仅基于种族分类的通婚的法律体系，是否违反了第十四修正案的平等保护条款和正当程序条款？ |
| Holding 法院裁定 |
Yes. The Court held that Virginia's statutory scheme violated both the Equal Protection Clause (because racial classifications are invidious and subject to the "most rigid scrutiny") and the Due Process Clause (because it deprived individuals of the fundamental liberty to marry). | 是的。法院裁定弗吉尼亚州的法律体系既违反了平等保护条款（因为种族分类是恶意的，需接受"最严格的审查"），也违反了正当程序条款（因为它剥夺了个人结婚的基本自由）。 |
| Decision/Disposition 判决结果 |
Reversed. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, thereby overturning the Lovings' convictions. | 撤销原判。最高法院撤销了弗吉尼亚州最高法院的判决，从而推翻了洛文夫妇的有罪判决。 |
| English 英文 | Chinese 中文 |
|---|---|
| Miscegenation | 异族通婚 |
| Racial Classification | 种族分类 |
| Equal Protection Clause | 平等保护条款 |
| Due Process Clause | 正当程序条款 |
| Fourteenth Amendment | 第十四修正案 |
| Statute | 制定法 |
| Constitutionality | 合宪性 |
| Appellant | 上诉人 |
| Appellee | 被上诉人 |
| Amicus Curiae | 法庭之友 |
| English 英文 | Chinese 中文 |
|---|---|
| violate the Equal Protection Clause | 违反平等保护条款 |
| on the sole basis of racial classifications | 仅基于种族分类 |
| cannot stand consistently with the Fourteenth Amendment | 无法与第十四修正案并存 |
| be subjected to the "most rigid scrutiny" | 需接受"最严格的审查" |
| deprive someone of liberty without due process | 未经正当程序剥夺自由 |
Landmark Decision: This case established that marriage is a fundamental right and that racial classifications in marriage laws are subject to strict scrutiny.
里程碑判决：本案确立了婚姻是一项基本权利，婚姻法中的种族分类需接受严格审查。
Constitutional Impact: Strengthened both the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
宪法影响：加强了第十四修正案的平等保护条款和正当程序条款。
Social Impact: Paved the way for future civil rights cases and advanced racial equality in the United States.
社会影响：为未来的民权案件铺平了道路，推动了美国的种族平等进程。