Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,795
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: + +
no edit summary
[[Image:Supreme Court.jpg|thumb|200px|US Supreme Court Building]]
[[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.
'''''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]]."