Perez v. Lippold

1. Perez v. Lippold By: Brianna Forte Ben Burns

2. Background • Case also known as “Perez v. Sharp” and “Perez v. Moroney” • Based upon codes 60 and 69, white people were not aloud to marry any other race • Perez and Davis applied for a marriage license • Sense Perez was Mexican she had to classify herself as “white” based upon her Spanish heritage • Davis had to classify himself as a “negro” • The county clerk (W. G. Sharp) refused to grant them their marriage license based upon civil codes 60 & 69 • Perez and Davis both belong to the Roman Catholic Church and wish to be married through their religion.

3. What are Civil Codes 60 & 69? • Civil Code 69 states, “… no license may be issued authorizing the marriage of a white person with a Negro, mulatto, Mongolian, or member of the Malay race.” • Civil Code 60 implements 69 and states, “All marriages of white persons with negroes, Mongolians, members of the Malay race, or mulattoes are illegal and void.”

4. Major Points of the Case • The first amendment of the constitution makes so that no law that prohibits the freedom of religion and the practice of it. • Marriage is more that a civil contract but also holds religious values. • Legislation infringing upon marriage therefore is against the law. • The right to marry is the right of “individuals” not of racial groups. • Sections 60 and 69 are to vague because they do not clearly define who the persons of each race are • Perez is an example

5. Logic/Reasoning of Judges for Supporting Decision • Edmons, Justice “I agree with the conclusion that marriage is ‘something more than a civil contract subject to regulation by the State; it is a fundamental right of free men.’ The right to marry, therefore, is protected by the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom” • “Even if a state could restrict the right to marry upon the basis of race alone, sections 60 and 69 of the Civil Code are invalid because they are too vague and uncertain to constitute a valid regulation.”

6. What does this mean? • In summary, decining someone a marriage license based on race alone was unconstitutional for two reasons: • Even IF a marriage license could be declined based on race alone, sections 60 and 69 of the civil code were too vague to uphold it • Because the couple had the blessing of the Catholic church to be married within its walls, declining their marriage infringed upon the right of freedom of religion

7. The ruling’s impact on the Practice of Democracy • The court ultimately ruled in favor of Perez and Davis which reinforced a handful of principles of democracy • Liberty  Everyone granted equal civil liberties and human rights (marriage and religion) which cannot be denied by the governement • Rule of Law  Laws were applied equally to all, despite the fact that neither Perez or Davis were considered to be fully ‘white’ • Equality  All people are equal before the law and everyone shares a set of similar rights

8. Significance and Aftermath • Perez v. Lippold made the California Supreme Court the first of the century to rule that segregation of marriage based on race or (anti-miscegenation laws) violates the U.S. Constitution. • The court case Loving v. Virginia of 1967 followed by holding that the state of Virginia’s anti-miscegenation laws were also unconstitutional • Loving v. Virginia ultimiately declared that all anti-miscegeneation laws in the United States were invalid and unconstitutional

9. End Notes • http://www.brownat50.org/brownCases/PreBrownCases/PerezvLippoldCal1948.html • http://www2.law.columbia.edu/faculty_franke/Gay_Marriage/Perez%20edited.pdf • http://hcom266.com/fc-elements-of-dem.html • http://sshl.ucsd.edu/brown/perez.htm • http://www.multiracial.com/government/perez-v-sharp.html