- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,823
- Reaction score
- 30,079
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
No, because it was based on race alone which the 14th amendment specifically addresses. What was incorrect in Loving v. Virginia was that marriage or any other state granted, by license' status is a "basic right". States grant the "right" to drive via license but may deny that "right" based on many, otherwise unconstitutional, factors - for example not paying a ticket (or child support) without any due process at all.
You are very wrong on this. Driving is a privilege, but under equal protection laws, may not be limited based on race, sex, sexuality, ethnicity (although citizenship is actually an approved reason to deny people the right to having a state driver's license), and in certain ways, age or disability (when those things do not actually affect the ability to drive or really just can't be justified as furthering a state interest).
Examples:
Unconstitutional - not allowing Asians to get a driver's license
Constitutional - not allowing anyone who is not a citizenship to get a driver's license (although some states do allow non-citizens to get a license)
Unconstitutional - restricting or removing a driver's license between the ages of 37 and 42 (pretty sure the state would have a very hard time showing a legitimate state interest furthered by such a restriction/law)
Constitutional - age limits that do not allow a 12 year old to drive (can be legitimately shown to further a state interest in preventing accidents on the road from immature drivers and lack of legitimate need of a license at that age)
Unconstitutional - requiring heterosexuals, and only heterosexuals, to take a driving test for a license; anyone willing to put homosexual or bisexual on their license doesn't need to take a driving test
Constitutional - requiring everyone, regardless of their sexuality to pass a driving test for a license