Fordham Law Review
Loving v. Virginia, interracial marriage, anti-miscegenation, segregation, white nationalism, endogamy, race
Fifty years after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Loving v. Virginia that prohibitions against interracial marriages were unconstitutional, strong cultural opposition to interracial couples, marriages, and families continues to exist. Illustrative of this opposition is the controversy over an Old Navy clothing store advertisement posted on Twitter in spring 2016. The advertisement depicted an African American woman and a white man together with a presumably mixed-race child. The white man is carrying the boy on his back. It is a clear depiction of an interracial family. Although seemingly innocuous, this advertisement sparked a flood of comments expressing open hostility and outrage at the depiction.
This Article is divided into three parts. Part I analyzes the Loving decision striking down anti-miscegenation laws and examines the segregationists' justifications for anti-miscegenation laws. Next, Part II explores the historical opposition of white segregationists to interracial marriages, families, and children and argues that the principle and practice of endogamy is a central feature of Jim Crow segregation. Finally, Part III examines the present ideology of white nationalism and shows that white nationalists oppose interracial unions and families for some of the same reasons that white segregationists opposed them. Specifically, white nationalists oppose interracial families because they are one of the main factors contributing to the so-called genocide of the white race.
Oh, Reginald, "Fear of a Multiracial Planet: Loving's Children and the Genocide of the White Race" (2018). Law Faculty Articles and Essays. 1036.