In 1967, the Supreme Court struck down laws banning interracial marriage in the landmark case Loving v. Virginia. However, the rejection of interracial marriage bans seems to have had no effect on a justice of the peace in Louisiana, who refuses to perform interracial marriages. 

The explanation Keith Bardwell, the justice of the peace in question, provides for his refusal to perform interracial marriages is that he doesn’t “believe in mixing the races that way.” He further tries to justify his refusal by stating his observation that interracial marriages do not last long and the children resulting from these unions are not accepted in the community. 

Bardwell’s “logic” on this issue seems pretty questionable. He claims interracial marriages often result in divorce; but in this day and age, married couples, regardless of the individuals involved, have a pretty difficult time making their marriages work. About 50 percent of marriages end in divorce. Perhaps Bardwell should stop performing all marriages because marriage as an institution is somewhat unsuccessful. 

Bardwell’s second argument is that children in interracial families are unlikely to be accepted by the community. As someone of a mixed ethnic background, I know that it’s sometimes difficult to define yourself because you are unsure of what “group” you belong to. This internal struggle is not necessarily a bad thing though. President Obama is biracial, and this one facet of his life definitely hasn’t held him back. The United States is becoming a much more diverse country, and I don’t think having a mixed background is as much of an impediment as Bardwell believes it to be.

I’m interested in knowing where he draws the line in performing marriages. It would be interesting to learn whether or not Bardwell marries people of different religions or if he marries Asian-Americans and whites, for example. I also wonder how gay marriage opponents, who oppose the “destruction of the sanctity of marriage”, will feel about this incident. After all, Bardwell’s justification for refusing to marry interracial couples seems to be pretty similar to this argument.

I do not understand how a justice of the peace can justify not performing certain marriages because he personally disapproves of them. As a public official, his private opinions should not really factor into his job; he’s just supposed to follow the law. What’s surprising to me is that this conflict has not come up before — this is not the first interracial couple Bardwell has refused to marry. At any rate, he probably won’t keep his job because now that his beliefs have been publicized, he will be facing enormous pressure to resign. 

It’s just unsettling that people in the 21st century would be concerned about the mixing of races. Any American who traces their ancestry back far enough is likely to find a Native American or someone else of non-Western European stock. In Harry Potter terms, no can definitively claim that he or she is a “pureblood.” There is no real danger in the mixing of races, only racist, archaic concerns.

Without a doubt, Bardwell is abusing his public position by letting his personal discomfort with interracial marriages inform his decisions about which couples “deserve” marriage certificates. 

—Aimee Sobhani is a junior in the College of Arts and Science. She can be reached at aimee.f.sobhani@vanderbilt.edu.