Baker v. Carr

What was the significance of the ruling in Baker v. Carr (1962)?

It established that federal courts have jurisdiction to hear redistricting cases and addressed the application of 'one person, one vote' principles.

What was the central issue in the Baker v. Carr case?

The apportionment of Tennessee's legislative districts, which had not been updated since 1901, leading to unequal representation.

What principle was recognized by the Supreme Court in Baker v. Carr regarding legislative districts?

Legislative districts should be roughly equal in population to ensure each citizen's vote has equal weight, known as 'one person, one vote'.

What did the Supreme Court decide regarding judicial review of legislative apportionment in Baker v. Carr?

The court held that challenges to legislative apportionment were justiciable, meaning they could be reviewed by federal courts.

What was the key amendment involved in the implications of the Baker v. Carr ruling?

The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, which ensures equal protection of the laws.

What did the dissenting opinions in Baker v. Carr argue?

That redistricting should be managed by state legislatures as a political issue, not by the courts.

What later case was influenced by the ruling in Baker v. Carr?

Reynolds v. Sims (1964), which firmly established the 'one person, one vote' principle in state and local legislative districts.

What impact did Baker v. Carr have on legal challenges to legislative districts?

It encouraged numerous redistricting cases in federal court, leading to significant reforms in legislative apportionment.

How did Baker v. Carr change the nature of political questions regarding legislative representation?

It concluded that the issue of legislative representation was not purely a political question and warranted judicial review.