Running on the C&O Canal and “Loving” Every Minute!

DATE: 2021-06-12
AO: Freestate
Q: Horshack
PAX: Deagle, Magoo, Old Bay
FNGs: CashOnly
COUNT: 5
WARMUP:
– SSH x 25 IC
– Michael Phelps x 15 IC
– Hill Billies x 15 IC
– Cherry Pickers x 15 IC
– Mountain Climbers x 15 IC
– Windmills x 15 IC

THE THANG:
5k run on the C&O Canal Tow Path
10 Merkins every two minutes (x15)

MARY:
-Scissors x 15 IC
-Dying Cockroach x 15 IC
-Plank-o-Rama 10×5
-Protractor x 60 seconds
-Flutter x 10

ANNOUNCEMENTS:
-F3 3 Year Convergence next Saturday June 19 at Teddy Roosevelt Island

COT: Anniversary of Loving v Virginia 1967

Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled
that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution. Beginning in 2013, it was cited as precedent in U.S. federal court decisions holding restrictions on
same-sex marriage in the United States unconstitutional, including in the 2015 Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges.
The case involved Mildred Loving, a woman of color, and her white husband Richard Loving, who in 1958 were sentenced
to a year in prison for marrying each other. Their marriage violated Virginia’s Racial Integrity Act of 1924, which
criminalized marriage between people classified as “white” and people classified as “colored”. The Lovings appealed their
conviction to the Supreme Court of Virginia, which upheld it. They then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to hear their case.
On June 12, 1967, the Court issued a unanimous decision in the Lovings’ favor and overturned their convictions. Its decision
struck down Virginia’s anti-miscegenation law and ended all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States.
Virginia had argued that its law was not a violation of the Equal Protection Clause because the punishment was the same
regardless of the offender’s race, and thus it “equally burdened” both whites and non-whites. The Court found that the law nonetheless violated the Equal Protection Clause because it was based solely on “distinctions drawn according to race”
and outlawed conduct—namely, getting married—that was otherwise generally accepted and which citizens were free to do.