Interracial marriage is legal in Indiana and has been since the state repealed its anti-miscegenation statute in 1965, two years before the U.S. Supreme Court struck down every remaining state ban in Loving v. Virginia. Indiana interracial marriage law today rests on that constitutional ruling and, since December 2022, on the federal Respect for Marriage Act. What Indiana does not have is a state statute explicitly affirming the right, and a 2026 attempt to add one was blocked on the House floor.
What Protects an Interracial Marriage in Indiana Now
Two layers of federal law carry the protection.
The first is Loving v. Virginia, decided unanimously in 1967. Chief Justice Earl Warren, writing for the Court, called marriage a “fundamental” right and “one of the basic civil rights of man,” and held that state racial classifications in marriage violate both the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court rejected the argument that such laws were constitutional because they punished both spouses equally, finding instead that the statutes were motivated by a desire to maintain white supremacy and served no legitimate governmental purpose.1Justia. Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1
The second is the Respect for Marriage Act, signed by President Biden on December 13, 2022. The law requires every state to recognize the validity of same-sex and interracial marriages performed in any U.S. jurisdiction, and it repealed the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.2Britannica. Respect for Marriage Act
One limit of the Respect for Marriage Act matters for anyone counting on it as a backstop. The statute does not prevent a state from enacting its own ban on interracial or same-sex marriage. It only requires that state to honor marriages performed elsewhere.2Britannica. Respect for Marriage Act So long as Loving stands, that limit is academic, because the Constitution itself forbids such a ban. If Loving were ever disturbed, the federal statute would still require Indiana to recognize an interracial marriage performed in another state, but it would not stop Indiana from refusing to issue a license at home.
Indiana’s two Republican senators split on the Respect for Marriage Act. Sen. Todd Young voted in favor; Sen. Mike Braun voted against.3U.S. Senate. Roll Call Vote 117th Congress, 2nd Session
The Gap in Indiana State Law
Indiana’s marriage code, Title 31, Article 11, sets out who may and may not marry in the state. It addresses prohibitions on same-sex marriage, marriage to close relatives, bigamy, and minimum age requirements. It contains no provision affirming the right to marry regardless of race.4Justia. Indiana Code Title 31, Article 11, Chapter 1 – Who May Marry
On February 10, 2026, State Rep. Maureen Bauer (D-South Bend) tried to close that gap. She offered a floor amendment to Senate Bill 76 declaring that no Indiana governmental body may “deny, restrict, or interfere with the right to marry based on race, color, ethnicity, or national origin.” Bauer said lawmakers had a responsibility to respond when rhetoric “questions who belongs based on race or background,” and that silence “risks allowing harmful ideas to go unchallenged.”5Indiana House Democrats. Bauer’s Amendment Affirming Marriage Equality Blocked in House
The amendment was blocked, along with most other Democratic amendments to the bill.6WRTV. Some Lawmakers Say SB 76 Could Threaten Marriage Equality in the Hoosier State SB 76, the FAIRNESS Act, passed the Senate 37–11 on February 25, 2026, and was signed into law by Governor Mike Braun on March 5, 2026, as Public Law 106.7Indiana General Assembly. Senate Bill 76 The result is that protection for interracial marriage in Indiana continues to rest entirely on federal constitutional and statutory law.8The Indiana Lawyer. Interracial Marriages to Get Added Protection Under New Law
How Indiana Got Here
Indiana’s ban on interracial marriage ran for well over a century. An 1840 statute, “An Act to Prohibit the Amalgamation of Whites and Blacks,” imposed fines of $1,000 to $5,000 and prison sentences of ten to twenty years on interracial couples, with fines as high as $10,000 for ministers who officiated.9Wabash College. Traces – Hickerson By the mid-twentieth century, Indiana law treated marriage “between a white person and a person with one-eighth or more Negro blood” as a felony, voided the marriage automatically, and carried heavy fines and imprisonment.10Indiana History Blog. Before It Was Legal: A Black-White Marriage, 1945–1987
The Indiana Supreme Court upheld the ban in State v. Gibson (1871), rejecting challenges based on the Fourteenth Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and invoking “natural law” and “divine” intent.9Wabash College. Traces – Hickerson The legislature finally repealed the statute in 1965, making Indiana one of fourteen states to drop its anti-miscegenation law in the two decades before Loving.11Tennessee State Library and Archives. Miscegenation Laws
Why the Question Keeps Coming Up
The current legal footing is secure, but the issue has resurfaced three times in the last several years, which is why people search for it.
In June 2022, Justice Clarence Thomas concurred in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and wrote that the Court “should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents,” specifically naming Griswold v. Connecticut, Lawrence v. Texas, and Obergefell v. Hodges. Thomas did not name Loving, though Loving relied in part on the same doctrine. Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh included references to Loving in their own opinions, noting it should not be revisited.12NBC News. Thomas Wants Supreme Court to Overturn Landmark Rulings
In March 2022, then-Sen. Mike Braun was asked at a virtual press conference whether Loving was an example of the kind of “judicial activism” he criticized in the context of Roe v. Wade. Braun answered yes, saying states should be free to “manifest their points of view” rather than have the Court “homogenize it across the country.”13CNN. Indiana GOP Sen. Mike Braun Says Interracial Marriage Should Be Left to States He added, “If you’re not wanting the Supreme Court to weigh in on issues like that, you’re not going to be able to have your cake and eat it too. I think that’s hypocritical.”14Axios. Sen. Mike Braun Suggests Interracial Marriage Should Be Left to States Hours later Braun issued a statement saying he had “misunderstood” the question, that “there is no question the Constitution prohibits discrimination of any kind based on race,” and that he condemned racism “in any form.”15The Indiana Lawyer. Indiana Sen. Braun Walks Back Interracial Marriage Comments
The 2026 statehouse episode followed a February 2 committee hearing on SB 76, at which a public witness named Ryan Neuhaus, speaking for a group called the Mass Deportation Coalition, told lawmakers that the “mixing of populations” was harmful to the country’s culture and heritage. Pressed by Rep. Bauer to define his terms, Neuhaus said “Americans and Aliens. So those who are not citizens.”6WRTV. Some Lawmakers Say SB 76 Could Threaten Marriage Equality in the Hoosier State Bauer’s blocked amendment eight days later was the direct response.
None of these events changed the law. If you are married to, or plan to marry, someone of a different race in Indiana, your marriage is valid, the state must issue a license, and no Indiana official may refuse to recognize it. The protection sits in federal law rather than state law, and the 2026 vote means that is unlikely to change soon.