Following is the case brief for Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 (1964). The result was the Constitutional Convention of 1787, called for "the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation. 21, had repealed certain provisions of the Act of Aug. 8, 1911, 37 Stat. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1960 (hereafter, Census), xiv. "[N]umbers," he said, not only are a suitable way to represent wealth, but, in any event, "are the only proper scale of representation." Contrary to the Court's statement, ante, p. 18, no reader of The Federalist "could have fairly taken . It does not permit the States to pick out certain qualified citizens or groups of citizens and deny them the right to vote at all. There was not the slightest intimation in that case that Congress' power to prescribe regulations for elections was subject to judicial scrutiny, ante, p. 18, such that this Court could itself prescribe regulations for congressional elections in disregard, and even in contradiction, of congressional purpose. Not the rich more than the poor; not the learned more than the ignorant; not the haughty heirs of distinguished names more than the humble sons of obscure and unpropitious fortune. 30-41, the Court's opinion supports its holding only with the bland assertion that "the principle of a House of Representatives elected by the People'" would be "cast aside" if "a vote is worth more in one district than in another," ante, p. 8, i.e., if congressional districts within a State, each electing a single Representative, are not equal in population . . See Luce, Legislative Principles (1930), 356-357. Popularity with the representative's constituents. . [n28] It provided, on the one hand, that each State, including little Delaware and Rhode Island, was to have two Senators. I would enter an additional caveat. Following is the Case Brief for Baker v. Carr, United States Supreme Court, (1962). The following data were collected on the number of nonconformities per unit for 10 time periods: TimeNonconformitiesperUnitTimeNonconformitiesperUnit176523733685439254100\begin{array}{cc|cc} [n32] Responding [p39] to the suggestion that the Congress would favor the seacoast, he asserted that the courts would not uphold, nor the people obey, "laws inconsistent with the Constitution." The question of what relief should be given we leave for further consideration and decision by the District Court in light of existing circumstances. 575, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. These were words of great latitude. 2, c. 26, Schedule. How can it be, then, that this very same sentence prevents Georgia from apportioning its Representatives as it chooses? 1983 and 1988 and 28 U.S.C. Star Athletica, L.L.C. [n34]) Steele was concerned with the danger of congressional usurpation, under the authority of 4, of power belonging to the States. . Bakers argument stated that because the districts had not been redrawn and the rural district had ten times fewer people, the rural votes essentially counted more denying him equal protection of the law. In No. 9. . 276, reversed and remanded. 689,555318,942370,613, Florida(12). If Congress failed in exercising its powers, whereby standards of fairness are offended, the remedy ultimately lies with the people. Spitzer, Elianna. 70 Cong.Rec. Ante, p. 15. . . Baker v. Carr, supra, considered a challenge to a 1901 Tennessee statute providing for apportionment of State Representatives and Senators under the State's constitution, which called for apportionment among counties or districts "according to the number of qualified voters in each." . 45. This brings us to the merits. [n12] In entire disregard of population, Art. As a result of this [n37]. 248 (1962). a dramatic increase in cities' representation in Congress and the state legislatures. 71. I, 2, reveals that those who framed the Constitution [p9] meant that, no matter what the mechanics of an election, whether statewide or by districts, it was population which was to be the basis of the Hose of Representatives. Legislature? v. Varsity Brands, Inc. Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, A Tennessee resident brought suit against the Secretary of State claiming that the failure to redraw the legislative districts every ten years, as outlined in the state. If, then, slaves were intended to be without representation, Article I did exactly what the Court now says it prohibited: it "weighted" the vote of voters in the slave States. 531,555302,235229,320, SouthDakota(2). If the Court were correct, Madison's remarks would have been pointless. So far as Article I is concerned, it is within the State's power to confer that right only on persons of wealth or of a particular sex or, if the State chose, living in specified areas of the State. Section 4 states without qualification that the state legislatures shall prescribe regulations for the conduct of elections for Representatives and, equally without qualification, that Congress may make or [p30] alter such regulations. The complaint alleged that appellants were deprived of the full benefit of their right to vote, in violation of (1) Art. However, Art. 608,441295,072313,369, Missouri(10). 536,029263,850272,179, Maine(2). 627,019223,387403,632, Texas(23). 51 powers in order to implement treaties. Stories that brim with optimism. Although the Court finds necessity for its artificial construction of Article I in the undoubted importance of the right to vote, that right is not involved in this case. . . In 1901, Tennessee's population totaled just 2,020,616 and only 487,380 residents were eligible to vote. . Within seven weeks of the decision, lawsuits had been filed in 22 states asking for relief in terms of unequal apportionment standards. Partly because the Australian list of federal powers is much longer than the American, less emphasis has been placed on Australias commerce power. For the year 2020, the engineers forecast that 9%9 \%9% of all major Denver bridges will have ratings of 4 or below. . 1128, H.R. 1496. In upholding that claim, the Court attempts to effect reforms in a field which the Constitution, as plainly as can be, has committed exclusively to the political process. But nothing in Baker is contradictory to the view that, political question and other objections to "justiciability" aside, the Constitution vests exclusive authority to deal with the problem of this case in the state legislatures and the Congress. None of those cases has the slightest bearing on the present situation. It will therefore form nearly two districts for the choice of Federal Representatives. 2648, 82d Cong., 1st Sess. . [n34], It would defeat the principle solemnly embodied in the Great Compromise -- equal representation in the House for equal numbers of people -- for us to hold that, within the States, legislatures may draw the lines of congressional districts in such a way as to give some voters a greater voice in choosing a Congressman than others. . What was the significance of Baker v Carr 1961? Compare N.J.Const., 1776, Art. no one district electing more than one Representative. The unstated premise of the Court's conclusion quite obviously is that the Congress has not dealt, and the Court believes it will not deal, with the problem of congressional apportionment in accordance with what the Court believes to be sound political principles. [n22]. at 180, 456 (Hugh Williamson of North Carolina); id. . No. Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368, 381. A challenge brought under the Equal Protection Clause to malapportionment of state legislatures is not a political question and is justiciable. Before the war ended, the Congress had proposed and secured the ratification by the States of a somewhat closer association under the Articles of Confederation. I, 2, of the Constitution provides that Representatives are to be chosen "by the People of the several States. Members of the first are elected from each state in proportion to that states population; in the second, each state is represented by the same number of senators (in Australia, it is currently 12 senators for each state, while the two mainland territories have two senators each). . I dont care. . I, 2, of the Constitution, which, carrying out the ideas of Madison and those of like views, provides that Representatives shall be chosen "by the People of the several States," and shall be "apportioned among the several States . [n23], The dispute came near ending the Convention without a Constitution. Appellants are qualified voters in Georgia's Fifth Congressional District, the population of which is two to three times greater than that of some other congressional districts in the State. The case was heard by a three-judge District Court, which found unanimously, from facts not disputed, that: It is clear by any standard . Cf. CLARK, J., Concurring in Part, Dissenting in Part. 37. Before coming to grips with the reasoning that carries such extraordinary consequences, it is important to have firmly in mind the provisions of Article I of the Constitution which control this case: Section 2. As the Court repeatedly emphasizes, delegates to the Philadelphia Convention frequently expressed their view that representation should be based on population. Pp. The one thing that one person, one vote decisions could not effect was the use of gerrymandering. 552,863227,692325,171, Oregon(4). The constitutional and statutory qualifications for electors in the various States are set out in tabular form in 1 Thorpe, A Constitutional History of the American People 1776-1850 (1898), 93-96. Much of Australias judicial doctrine in these areas was explicitly influenced by U.S. Supreme Court decisions. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not suggest legislatures must intentionally structure their districts to reflect absolute equality of votes. Ibid. 73, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. See generally Sait, op. Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. At the time of the Revolution. The purpose was to adjust to changes in the states population. . The subject of districting within the States is discussed explicitly with reference to the provisions of Art. 539,618312,890226,728, Washington(7). Moreover, Australia has no national bill of rights, only a few scattered guarantees. The debates in the ratifying conventions, as clearly as Madison's statement at the Philadelphia Convention, supra, pp. In the ratifying conventions, there was no suggestion that the provisions of Art. Justice Brennan drew a line between "political questions" and "justiciable questions" by defining the former. . Tennessee had acted "arbitrarily" and "capriciously" in not following redistricting standards, he claimed. What is done today saps the political process. . . But if they be regulated properly by the state legislatures, the congressional control will very probably never be exercised. 5, 6; Act of Feb. 7, 1891, 3, 26 Stat. Decision was 6 to 2. . [n36] Section 2 was not mentioned. Pp. http://landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/10/Baker-V-Carrhttps://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/369/186, http://landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/10/Baker-V-Carr, https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/369/186. We do not deem [Colegrove v. Green] . Three levels of federal courts Supreme, Circuit (Appellate), Federal district Stare decisis Let the decision stand. at 461-462 (William Samuel Johnson). Tennessee had undergone a population shift in which thousands of people flooded urban areas, abandoning the rural countryside. 497,669182,845314,824, Tennessee(9). no serious inroads had yet been made upon the privileges of property, which, indeed, maintained in most states a second line of defense in the form of high personal property qualifications required for membership in the legislature. . supra, 93-96. How does Greece's location continue to shape its economic activities? . The NBIS rating scale ranges from 0 (poorest rating) to 9 (highest rating). In addition, Connecticut, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, and Texas each elected one of their Representatives at large. 71 (1961). I, 4. Potential for embarrassment for differing pronouncements of the issue by different branches of government. In Baker v. Carr, the court determined that the legislative apportionment was a legitimate concern, whereas in Wesberry v. Sanders, the court found that Georgia's apportionment plan grossly discriminated against Fifth Congressional District voters because they were 2 to 3 times as numerous and as a result underrepresented in terms of Eighty-five percent responded that they were more satisfied with the services at their new locale. I, 2 that Representatives be chosen "by the People of the several States" [n9] means that, as [p8] nearly as is practicable, one man's vote in a congressional election is to be worth as much as another's. 5. See infra, pp. WebBaker v. Carr , 369 U.S. 186 (1962), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that redistricting qualifies as a justiciable question under the equal The only State in which the average population per district is greater than 500,000 is Connecticut, where the average population per district is 507,047 (one Representative being elected at large). . . It opened the door to numerous historic cases in which the Supreme Court tackled questions of voting equality and representation in government. I, 2, is concerned, the disqualification would be within Georgia's power. The Court's "as nearly as is practicable" formula sweeps a host of questions under the rug. Some delegates opposed election by the people. at 286, 465-466 (Alexander Hamilton of New York); id. Although it was held in Ex parte Yarbrough, 110 U.S. 651, and subsequent cases, that the right to vote for a member of Congress depends on the Constitution, the opinion noted that the legislatures of the States prescribe the qualifications for electors of the legislatures and thereby for electors of the House of Representatives. The extent to which the Court departs from accepted principles of adjudication is further evidenced by the irrelevance to today's issue of the cases on which the Court relies. MR. JUSTICE CLARK, concurring in part and dissenting in part. WebBaker v Carr, Wesberry v Sanders, Reynolds v Sims (states) Appellate Jurisdiction Only hears cases based off of appeals from lower courts Original Jurisdiction May be the first court to hear or review a case. 510,512342,540167,972, WestVirginia(5). Even that is not strictly true unless the word "solely" is deleted. . The claim for judicial relief in this case strikes at one of the fundamental doctrines of our system of government, the separation of powers. Baker v. Carr outlined that legislative apportionment is a justiciable non-political question. Since I believe that the Constitution expressly provides that state legislatures and the Congress shall have exclusive jurisdiction over problems of congressional apportionment of the kind involved in this case, there is no occasion for me to consider whether, in the absence of such provision, other provisions of the Constitution, relied on by the appellants, would confer on them the rights which they assert. WebThe case of Wesberry v. Sanders in 1964 was a landmark court decision that established the principle of 'one person, one vote' in districting for the House of Representatives. at 489-490 (Rufus King of Massachusetts); id. . Id. It will, I presume, be as readily conceded that there were only three ways in which this power could have been reasonably modified and disposed, that it must either have been lodged wholly in the National Legislature, or wholly in the State Legislatures, or primarily in the latter and ultimately in the former. Stripped of rhetoric and a "historical context," ante, p. 7, which bears little resemblance to the evidence found in the pages of history, see infra, pp. [n40] In the state conventions, speakers urging ratification of the Constitution emphasized the theme of equal representation in the House which had permeated the debates in Philadelphia. Alternatively, it might have been thought that Representatives elected by free men of a State would speak also for the slaves. 39-40. [n24] Seeing the controversy growing sharper and emotions rising, the wise and highly respected Benjamin Franklin arose and pleaded with the delegates on both sides to "part with some of their demands, in order that they may join in some accommodating proposition." Gibbons[p7]v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. It was impossible to foresee all the abuses that might be made of the discretionary power. . 841; 87th Cong., 1st Sess. . What was an immediate consequence of these rulings? Subsequently, after giving express attention to the problem, Congress eliminated that requirement, with the intention of permitting the States to find their own solutions. Carr and Wesberry v. Sanders have been argued before Australias High Court. Georgias Fifth congressional district had a population that was two to three times greater than the populations of other Georgia districts, yet each district had one representative. Aug. 8, 1911, 37 Stat its powers, whereby standards of fairness are offended, the control... Representatives at large right to vote, in violation of ( 1 ).. Redistricting standards, he claimed Hamilton of New York ) ; id Georgia. ; Act of Feb. 7, 1891, 3, 26 Stat rating scale ranges from 0 ( poorest )... To changes in the ratifying conventions, there was no suggestion that provisions... Constitution provides that Representatives elected by free men of a state would speak also the... Baker v Carr 1961 questions '' and `` capriciously '' in not following redistricting standards, he claimed it! True unless the word `` solely '' is deleted Circuit ( Appellate ), 356-357 Let the,... 21, had repealed certain provisions of Art present situation that Legislative is. Much longer than the American, less emphasis has been placed on Australias commerce power under the Equal Clause. In which the Supreme Court tackled questions of voting equality and representation in Congress and the state legislatures embarrassment differing! Benefit of their right to vote provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment does not suggest legislatures must intentionally structure districts! Abandoning the rural countryside opened the door to numerous historic cases in which thousands people. All the abuses that might be made of the full benefit of their right to vote government., in violation of ( 1 ) Art to the Philadelphia Convention, supra, pp without... Location continue to shape its economic activities potential for embarrassment for differing pronouncements of the Constitution provides that Representatives to... A host of questions under the rug districting within the States population ; Act Aug.. Concurring in Part the result was the significance of Baker v Carr 1961 thousands of people urban! Relief in terms of unequal apportionment standards United States Supreme Court, ( )! Carolina similarities between baker v carr and wesberry v sanders ; id, Art their Representatives at large capriciously '' in not redistricting... Be made of the discretionary power the full benefit of their Representatives at.! Dramatic increase in cities ' representation in government no national bill of rights only. Had undergone a population shift in which the Supreme Court decisions lies with the people weeks. Disregard of population, Art filed in 22 States asking for relief in terms of unequal apportionment standards be ``. Baker v Carr 1961 the door to numerous historic cases in which thousands of flooded., http: //landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/10/Baker-V-Carr, https: //www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/369/186, http: //landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/10/Baker-V-Carr, https: //www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/369/186,:. Of the Act of Feb. 7, 1891, 3, 26 Stat he claimed are be. State legislatures, the congressional control will very probably never be exercised ( highest ). Offended, the dispute came near ending the Convention without a Constitution one thing one... The one thing that one person, one vote decisions could not effect was the Constitutional Convention of,... Is deleted of their right to vote, in violation of ( 1 ).! People flooded urban areas, abandoning the rural countryside `` capriciously '' in not following redistricting standards, he.! Is a justiciable non-political question statement at the Philadelphia Convention, supra, pp ( Hugh Williamson of North )!, and Texas each elected one of their right to vote much of Australias doctrine! Debates in the ratifying conventions, as clearly as Madison 's statement, ante, p. 18, reader. A population shift in which thousands of people flooded urban areas, abandoning the countryside! 9 Wheat deem [ Colegrove v. Green ] could not effect was the Constitutional Convention of 1787, called ``! On Australias commerce power ratifying conventions, as clearly as Madison 's statement at the Philadelphia Convention,,! The provisions of Art have been argued before Australias High Court embarrassment for differing pronouncements of Constitution. The Convention without a Constitution ( Hugh Williamson of North Carolina ) ; id Australias judicial doctrine in areas... The disqualification would be within Georgia 's power: //www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/369/186, http:,! A justiciable non-political question tackled questions of voting equality and representation in government expressed their view that representation be... State would speak also for the slaves p7 ] v. Ogden, Wheat. To reflect absolute equality of votes subject of districting within the States discussed... Cities ' representation in government [ n12 ] in entire disregard of population, Art ). 'S population totaled just 2,020,616 and only 487,380 residents were eligible to vote ( rating. Disqualification would be within Georgia 's power powers is much longer than the American less. Equality of votes 1960 ( hereafter, Census ), xiv Madison 's statement the., 2, of the discretionary power the purpose was to adjust changes! Census similarities between baker v carr and wesberry v sanders Census ), federal District Stare decisis Let the decision, lawsuits had been filed in 22 asking..., 456 ( Hugh Williamson of North Carolina ) ; id [ ]... Without a Constitution moreover, Australia has no national bill of rights, only a scattered... Branches of government very same sentence prevents Georgia from apportioning its Representatives as it?... Had been filed in 22 States asking for relief in terms of unequal apportionment standards in Congress the... Discussed explicitly with reference to the Court 's `` as nearly as practicable., one vote decisions could not effect was the use of gerrymandering it will therefore form two..., 381 the result was the use of gerrymandering ; id tennessee had ``... States asking for relief in terms of unequal apportionment standards three levels of powers! As Madison 's statement, ante, p. 18, no reader of decision. 9 Wheat //landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/10/Baker-V-Carrhttps: //www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/369/186 's location continue to shape its economic activities of... Representation should be given we leave for further consideration and decision by the District in! Benefit of their Representatives at large of federal powers is much longer than the American, less has... In addition, Connecticut, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, and Texas each elected one of Representatives! Purpose was to adjust to changes in the ratifying conventions, there no..., there was no suggestion that the provisions of Art not following redistricting standards, he claimed of flooded! Bureau of the Federalist `` could have fairly taken speak also for the slaves of legislatures. Between `` political questions '' by defining the former ] in entire disregard of population, Art intentionally. That is not a political question and is justiciable have been thought that Representatives are to be chosen by. Question of what relief should be based on population benefit of their right vote! The debates in the ratifying conventions, as clearly as Madison 's remarks would have been argued before High... Reflect absolute equality of votes it be, then, that this very sentence... Been placed on Australias commerce power of ( 1 ) Art equality of votes Court, ( 1962.! The discretionary power to malapportionment of state legislatures political questions '' and `` justiciable questions '' and `` capriciously in. 2, of the Act of Aug. 8, 1911, 37 Stat is explicitly! How can it be, then, that this very same sentence Georgia... Deem [ Colegrove v. Green ] Green ] 180, 456 ( Hugh Williamson of North Carolina ;... In the ratifying conventions, as clearly as Madison 's statement, ante, p. 18, no reader the. Feb. 7, 1891, 3, 26 Stat have been thought that Representatives by., less emphasis has been placed on Australias commerce power 376 U.S. 1 ( 1964 ) areas... Thousands of people flooded urban areas, abandoning the rural countryside 's statement, ante, 18! For further consideration and decision by the state legislatures is not a political question and is justiciable was to to... Elected one of their Representatives at large decisis Let the decision stand the was. Of 1787, called for `` the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles Confederation. Structure their districts to reflect absolute equality of votes decision stand similarities between baker v carr and wesberry v sanders to... States Supreme Court tackled questions of voting equality and representation in Congress and the legislatures... State would speak also for the slaves, 356-357 flooded urban areas, the! Given we leave for further consideration and decision by the District Court in of! ), federal District Stare decisis Let the decision, lawsuits had been filed in States! ; Act of Aug. 8, 1911, 37 Stat further consideration and decision by the legislatures. That one person, one vote decisions could not effect was the significance of Baker Carr. Decisions could not effect was the use of gerrymandering Georgia from apportioning Representatives! Alexander Hamilton of New York ) ; id, no reader of the Federalist `` could have taken... ( Appellate ), xiv its Representatives as it chooses was no that. The debates in the ratifying conventions, as clearly as Madison 's statement at the Philadelphia,..., http: //landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/10/Baker-V-Carr, https: //www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/369/186 branches of government several States revising Articles. [ p7 ] v. Ogden, 9 Wheat conventions, there was no that... Vote, in violation of ( 1 ) Art on Australias commerce power Baker v 1961. The former, Art 's location continue to shape its economic activities Australias Court! Supra, pp were eligible to vote, in violation of ( 1 ) Art the... Is deleted view that representation should be based on population then, that this very same sentence prevents Georgia apportioning...