In Loving, Justice Carrico stated that "There is no dispute that Richard Perry Loving is a white person and that Mildred Jeter Loving is a colored person within the meaning of Code, § 20-58. Nor is there any dispute that the actions of the defendants, as set forth in the indictment, violated the provisions of Code, § 20-58." Ignoring a whole host of Supreme Court precedents, Carrico went on to rely on the infamous and discredited "Plessy v. Ferguson", 163 U.S. 537, 41 L. Ed. 256, 16 S. Ct. 1138 (1896) and its progeny, finding "Brown v. Board of Education", 347 U.S. 483, 98 L. Ed. 873, 74 S. Ct. 686 (1954) distinguishable, because Brown dealt with education and not marriage. Distinguishing Brown and its progeny, Justice Carrico observed that "it must be pointed out that none of them deals with miscegenation statutes or curtails a legal truth which has always been recognized that there is an overriding state interest in the institution of marriage. None of these decisions takes away from what was said by the United States Supreme Court in "Maynard v. Hill", 125 U.S. 190, 31 L. Ed. 654, 657, 8 S. Ct. 723: