Difference between revisions of "Baker v. Carr"
(New page: In ''Baker v. Carr'', 269 U.S. 186 (1962), the U.S. Supreme Court held that courts could redraw the boundaries of legislative districts. This altered the democratic control over redis...) |
|||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | [[Image:Supreme Court.jpg|thumb|200px|US Supreme Court Building]] | |
| + | '''''Baker v. Carr''''', 269 U.S. 186 (1962) is notable mostly for Justice [[William Brennan]]'s discussion of the [[political question doctrine]]. In a 6-2 decision, the Court held that the apportionment of state legislative districts is not a political question and can be reviewed by the courts if constitutional violations are alleged. Together with [[Reynolds v. Sims]], 377 U.S. 533 (1964), this decision created the "[[One man, one vote]]" requirement for state legislative apportionment. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This case was so vexatious for the Court that it held oral argument in it twice, after the initial internal vote on the Court was deadlocked at 4-4-1.<ref>https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/07/the-dissent-that-broke-a-justice/</ref> | ||
Justice [[William Brennan]] wrote this decision for the [[Warren Court]], declaring that it was the "responsibility of this Court as ultimate interpreter of the [[Constitution]]." | Justice [[William Brennan]] wrote this decision for the [[Warren Court]], declaring that it was the "responsibility of this Court as ultimate interpreter of the [[Constitution]]." | ||
| Line 5: | Line 8: | ||
Justice [[Felix Frankfurter]], joined by Justice [[John Harlan II]], complained in dissent that this was "a massive repudiation of the experience of our past in asserting destructively novel judicial power." | Justice [[Felix Frankfurter]], joined by Justice [[John Harlan II]], complained in dissent that this was "a massive repudiation of the experience of our past in asserting destructively novel judicial power." | ||
| − | == | + | == See also == |
| + | *[[Essay:the 25 Worst Court Decisions]] | ||
| − | [[ | + | ==External links== |
| − | [[ | + | *[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=369&invol=186 Case] at FindLaw |
| + | == References == | ||
| + | {{reflist}} | ||
| + | [[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]] | ||
| + | [[Category:United States Election Law]] | ||
Latest revision as of 02:53, July 10, 2025
Baker v. Carr, 269 U.S. 186 (1962) is notable mostly for Justice William Brennan's discussion of the political question doctrine. In a 6-2 decision, the Court held that the apportionment of state legislative districts is not a political question and can be reviewed by the courts if constitutional violations are alleged. Together with Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964), this decision created the "One man, one vote" requirement for state legislative apportionment.
This case was so vexatious for the Court that it held oral argument in it twice, after the initial internal vote on the Court was deadlocked at 4-4-1.[1]
Justice William Brennan wrote this decision for the Warren Court, declaring that it was the "responsibility of this Court as ultimate interpreter of the Constitution."
Justice Felix Frankfurter, joined by Justice John Harlan II, complained in dissent that this was "a massive repudiation of the experience of our past in asserting destructively novel judicial power."
See also
External links
- Case at FindLaw