Connect with us

Politics

Opinion: Interracial marriage went from criminal to commonplace. Could it go back?

Published

on

Opinion: Interracial marriage went from criminal to commonplace. Could it go back?

American love stories have a default race: white. If the love story is “interracial,” one person is white, and the other person is not. In a standard American rom-com, the only nonwhite characters are the white lead’s helpful best friends or underwritten colleagues.

Quincy, a Black man, and I, a South Asian woman, are none of these things.

“All I could think on the way here is when am I going to kiss you,” Quincy told me one day in 2009, three weeks after we had met. It was the “when” that got me; I was that impatient too.

More than 50 years earlier, on July 11, 1958, Richard and Mildred Loving woke up around 2 a.m. to find their local sheriff shining a flashlight over them.

“What are you doing in bed with this woman?” he demanded of Richard.

Advertisement

Richard was white, and Mildred was black.

The Lovings were charged with violating Virginia’s Racial Integrity Act of 1924, which criminalized marriage between people classified as “white” and “colored.” The Lovings took their case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which unanimously struck down Virginia’s law and ended race-based legal marriage restrictions nationwide on June 12, 1967.

The date is now recognized by cities, states and organizations across the country as Loving Day. It should be a national holiday.

I’m not sure how the authorities would have regarded Q and me back then — whether we would have been deemed an interracial couple or not. Would they have even cared about our union given that neither of us is white?

What I do know is that paranoia about interracial relationships is not unique to white Americans.

Advertisement

Early 20th century Indian immigrants to the United States, for example, invoked anti-miscegenation rhetoric as a way of establishing their claims to citizenship. Bhagat Singh Thind, a writer and World War I veteran, used the language of caste apartheid to make his own case to the Supreme Court in 1923: “The high-caste Hindu regards the aboriginal Indian Mongoloid in the same manner as the American regards the Negro, speaking from a matrimonial standpoint.” His argument was, in short, that as a person of high caste, he was practically white and therefore eligible for citizenship under federal immigration law, which limited naturalization to people of European and African descent.

Thind’s gambit — to weaponize one kind of discrimination against another — failed. The court ruled against him, and some 50 Indian Americans had their citizenship revoked over the next three years as a result.

Five years after Loving vs. Virginia, my parents, joined by the kind of inter-caste “love” marriage that Thind argued against, would come to the United States. Their passage was facilitated by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, with which the country opened its doors wider than ever to immigrants of Asian descent, though it prioritized skilled professionals who could contribute to the Space Race and other national priorities: scientists, engineers, doctors.

The U.S. government’s desire to beat the Russians may have played a role in the legislation, while schooling, class and caste privilege made medical and engineering degrees attainable for many Asian immigrants of the period. But it was the civil rights movement led by Black Americans that truly gave these newcomers a shot at a more humane, equitable life here.

And yet if it weren’t for Loving Day, I’m not sure I would have been aware of the Lovings as civil rights pioneers.

Advertisement

It was Quincy who pointed me to their story. In 2017, he — by then my husband — found a call for interracial couples to re-create an iconic 1965 image of Richard and Mildred Loving, shot by Grey Villet for Life magazine seven years after their arrest. I suggested we participate.

I always read the photo as showing Mildred in the course of doing something else when Richard scooped her into his arm. The husband’s face is tilted toward the camera as he leans in to kiss his wife. Mildred looks busy: Maybe it’s her posture, not leaning toward Richard but standing straight; maybe it’s her hair, not done up for the camera but in utilitarian bobby pins. It seems to capture a moment of embrace, of love, in the midst of a typical day.

Perhaps that’s what made me feel as if we could inhabit this photo. Quincy is always trying to scoop me up while I’m motoring about doing one of 10 million things in a day.

I think that’s the power of the photo. America doesn’t tend to read race as a love story. Race in America is seen as a story of pain and tragedy. But people are more than pain, more than tragic. Our lives together are ordinary as much as extraordinary.

That’s exactly what Richard and Mildred were fighting for: the right to an ordinary, kissing-amid-the-10-million-things-of-the-day kind of life.

Advertisement

The Lovings’ case would become a precedent for the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell vs. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage in 2015. The court ruled that “the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and … couples of the same sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty.”

The Pew Research Center found a more than fivefold increase in interracial marriage in the half-century since Loving vs. Virginia, with about 1 in 6 newlyweds married to someone of a different race.

For me, Loving Day is a testament to the everyday-ness of some civil disobedience. It’s also a challenge to the anti-Blackness that addles South Asian communities. From Thind onward, complicity in racism against Black people has been one way South Asians have tried to claim citizenship in America, so anti-Blackness is forever bound up with both assimilation and caste-based oppression.

“When am I going to kiss you?” Quincy said. We waited out of politeness, for privacy and to freely express our passion for each other. But that freedom is fragile.

In their dissent from the 2022 decision overturning Roe vs. Wade, Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor warned that “no one should be confident that this majority is done with its work,” calling Roe and Obergefell “part of the same constitutional fabric, protecting autonomous decision making over the most personal of life decisions.”

Advertisement

Like the Lovings, we can’t be sure history won’t pluck us out of our 10 million things, threatening us with a flashlight from the edge of our bed. Loving Day is not merely to celebrate the past. It’s to ensure that a future of freedom for love in all its forms is not an “if” but a “when.”

Nina Sharma is the author of “The Way You Make Me Feel: Love in Black and Brown.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Park Police union says officers ‘did everything they could’ during DC anti-Israel riot

Published

on

Park Police union says officers ‘did everything they could’ during DC anti-Israel riot

Following the protests at Union Station by anti-Israel agitators defacing federal property in protest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress, a Park Police union is pushing back against criticism that only a few arrests were made.

Thousands of Hamas-sympathizing agitators descended on Washington, D.C., Tuesday, at one point defacing federal monuments with phrases in support of the terrorist group responsible for the Oct. 7 attacks in Israel, saying, “Hamas is coming.” 

Twenty-three people were arrested at the protests, but some have suggested that number should have been higher. 

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., posted on X, “How many more times are they going to allow leftist degenerates who support terrorism and hate America to vandalize property and attack police? There should have been hundreds of arrests today in D.C. not just 23.”

HOUSE REPUBLICANS REPLACE AMERICAN FLAGS AT UNION STATION AFTER ANTI-ISRAEL PROTESTS

Advertisement

The Columbus Memorial Fountain at Union Station during an anti-Israel protest on the day Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed a joint meeting of Congress on Capitol Hill in Washington July 24, 2024.  (Reuters/Seth Herald)

But the U.S. Park Police Labor Committee is pushing back.

“Our officers on the ground did everything they could to protect life and property. In fact, despite having only 29 officers available to mitigate damage — 29! — with no additional help from the Department of the Interior, we processed several arrests for charges ranging from assault on a police officer to destruction of government property,” Kenneth Spencer, chairman of the United States Park Police Fraternal Order of Police, said in a statement. 

“That’s why it’s so disheartening to hear some members of Congress and members of the media, many of whom describe themselves as ‘champions’ of law enforcement, suggesting that officers gave protesters a ‘pass’ or that insufficient arrests were made. 

“Nothing could be further from the truth. Anyone who truly cares to understand the problem would see that our officer staffing crisis is at the root of our agency’s mission readiness. A small unit of 29 officers arrested 10 individuals while being assaulted by a mob of thousands. We simply did not have the staffing or resources to accomplish a mass arrest operation.”

Advertisement

SEE IT: THE MOST DRAMATIC PHOTOS FROM WEDNESDAY’S PRO-HAMAS WASHINGTON, D.C. PROTESTS

A pro-Palestinian demonstrator sprays graffiti on Christopher Columbus Memorial Fountain at Union Station

An anti-Israel demonstrator sprays graffiti on the Christopher Columbus Memorial Fountain at Union Station on the day of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to a joint meeting of Congress on Capitol Hill in Washington July 24, 2024.  (Reuters/Nathan Howard)

At least one demonstrator, whose face was covered, was spotted by Fox News carrying what appeared to be the flag of the terrorist group Hamas while others were heard shouting “Allahu Akbar.”

KAMALA HARRIS REACTS TO ANTI-ISRAEL RIOTS AT DC’S UNION STATION

Protesters-gather-for-Israeli-PM-Netanyahu's-address-to-Congress-in-Washington

Anti-Israel demonstrators burn an effigy depicting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu outside Union Station on the day of Netanyahu’s address to a joint meeting of Congress on Capitol Hill in Washington July 24, 2024.  (Reuters/Nathan Howard)

The White House condemned the protests Wednesday evening, calling the chaos “disgraceful.” 

Advertisement

“Identifying with evil terrorist organizations like Hamas, burning the American flag or forcibly removing the American flag and replacing it with another is disgraceful,” White House spokesperson Andrew Bates said in a comment to Fox News Digital Wednesday evening. 

Continue Reading

Politics

Ali: Kamala Harris has a campaign soundtrack: Beyoncé's 'Freedom'

Published

on

Ali: Kamala Harris has a campaign soundtrack: Beyoncé's 'Freedom'

Vice President Kamala Harris’ bid for the presidency has a soundtrack: Beyoncé’s “Freedom.”

The leading Democratic presidential candidate took the stage in her first visit to her Wilmington, Del. campaign headquarters and again during her first campaign rally in Wisconsin as the song played.

Now the cathartic anthem graces Harris’ first campaign ad, in which she says: “There are some people who think that we should be a country of chaos, of fear, of hate. But us? We choose something different: We choose freedom.”

Pit that against the musical number her competitor chose for his grand entrance on Night 3 of the Republican National Conference. Donald Trump walked out to James Brown’s “It’s a Man’s, Man’s, Man’s World,” a tone-deaf choice for a former president found liable for sexual abuse, who’s bragged about sexually assaulting women, a married man who paid hush money to a porn star and a former president who rolled back women’s reproductive rights 50 years with the repeal of Roe vs. Wade.

Maybe the Godfather of Soul would have endorsed Trump’s usage of his song, but Brown would be breaking with decades’ worth of musicians who’ve decried GOP candidates playing their tracks at rallies and booster events. Adele, Rihanna, R.E.M., the Rolling Stones, Prince, Neil Young, Guns N’ Roses and Queen are among the many artists who’ve spoken out against Trump using their tunes for campaign purposes.

Advertisement

Heart bristled when the McCain-Palin campaign used “Barracuda.” Tom Petty insisted George W. Bush back away from “I Won’t Back Down.” Bruce Springsteen decried Ronald Reagan’s appropriation of “Born in the U.S.A.”

Beyoncé, however, gave Harris her blessing to use “Freedom,” a single from her 2016 blockbuster album “Lemonade.” The song, which features guest rapper Kendrick Lamar, is an explosive expression of empowerment. At the time of its release, it spoke to public outcry around police killings of unarmed Black men and women — Eric Garner, Tamar Rice, Freddie Gray — and protests that were largely fueled by the ire of younger generations.

Whether Beyoncé was singing about the tyranny of a cheating spouse or racial injustice (or both), the song became an anthem for a new, potentially potent block of the American electorate.

For the first time, Gen Z and millennials could now account for as many votes as baby boomers and their elders, groups that have made up a majority of the electorate for decades.

Folks under 40 have grown up with Beyoncé and her ubiquitous work. Think of Beyoncé like the Who for boomers — their work is everywhere (Republican Sen. Rand Paul played the band’s anti-war hit “Baba O’Riley” when he campaigned in 2015) — or Nirvana for Gen X, except no one cares what we think. Whatever, nevermind.

Advertisement

The Harris campaign’s smart choice of music coincides with a willingness to lean into a meme culture that shot up organically around the 59-year-old VP since President Biden announced Sunday that he was dropping out of the race.

Pop star Charli XCX showed her support for Harris when she tweeted “Kamala IS brat.” The British singer is referring to the TikTok and Twitter edits of Harris’ image superimposed to songs from Charli XCX’s hit album “Brat.” The avalanche of memes come from a video clip in which Harris talks about her mother’s response to the hubris of youth: “You think you just fell out of a coconut tree? You exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you.”

Right-wing social media used the quote to deride Harris as inarticulate and a “word salad” master, but liberal swaths of Gen Z have since reworked the clip into emojis and memes that celebrate Harris’ nonconformist approach. She’s become a viral sensation, in a good way, unlike J.D. Vance’s damning “single cat lady” memes and a cringey internet joke about encounters with couches.

It’s rare that relevant talent will shill for a Republican candidate. Case in point: Trump’s pop culture ambassadors at this year’s RNC were Kid Rock, Kanye’s ex Amber Rose and former WWE wrestler Hulk Hogan, whose big moment was ripping his shirt off and screaming “Let Trump mania run wild!”

Harris chose to let freedom ring, and she has Queen Bey behind her.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Texas sues Biden administration over program giving birth control to teens without parents' knowledge

Published

on

Texas sues Biden administration over program giving birth control to teens without parents' knowledge

Texas officials are challenging a recent order from President Biden’s administration that would allow schools to distribute birth control to teenagers without parental consent.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced Thursday that his office is suing the Biden administration over their 2021 change to Title X guidelines banning parental consent requirements for birth control services.

“By attempting to force Texas healthcare providers to offer contraceptives to children without parental consent, the Biden Administration continues to prove they will do anything to implement their extremist agenda — even undermine the Constitution and violate the law,” Paxton said in a statement.

TRUMP SAYS HE ‘WILL NEVER ADVOCATE IMPOSING RESTRICTIONS ON BIRTH CONTROL’ OR OTHER CONTRACEPTIVES

A woman takes the next pill from a monthly pack of contraceptive pills.  (Annette Riedl/picture alliance via Getty Images)

Advertisement

The Texas legal battle began in Dec. 2021 when US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled that Title X — the federal program that provides free, confidential contraception to anyone regardless of age, income or immigration status —  violates parental rights and violates state and federal laws.

The case was argued by former solicitor general of Texas Jonathan Mitchell, representing father Alex Deanda, who said he was “raising each of his daughters in accordance with Christian teaching on matters of sexuality, which requires unmarried children to practice abstinence and refrain from sexual intercourse until marriage.”

SCHUMER PLANS VOTE ON ‘CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO CONTRACEPTION’ IN BID TO PROTECT SENATE DEMOCRAT MAJORITY

Matthew Kacsmaryk

Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, previously ruled that parents must be informed when birth control is provided to their children under 18 years old. (Senate Judiciary Committee via AP)

In response, the federal government updated guidelines to state that Title X projects “may not require consent of parents or guardians for the provision of services to minors, nor can any Title X project staff notify a parent or guardian before or after a minor has requested and/or received Title X family planning services.”

Paxton is now seeking a permanent injunction on this rule, which he claims defies the findings of the federal court.

Advertisement

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and his wife Angela are pictured outside the Supreme Court on Nov. 1, 2021.

Paxton and his wife Angela are pictured outside the Supreme Court. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Paxton filed the lawsuit in a federal court in Amarillo. It will likely be heard by Kacsmaryk, the same judge who previously ruled parents must be informed of birth control provided to their children.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending