Baker v. Carr, (1962) was the first of a series of Supreme Court cases of the early 60s that established the federal judiciary's right to determine the constitutionality of legislative districting within a state (the allocation of state and federal representatives to voters).
Background
Charles Baker and a group of other voters brought legal action against the State of Tennessee in US District Court under (42 USC §§ 1983, 1986) for deprivation of rights. Their suit alleged that a 1901 state statute apportioned representatives of the Tennessee General Assembly arbitrarily and was in violation of the Tennessee Constitution. According to Baker et al., the formula being used under the 1901 law ignored economic and population growth centers, resulting in a situation where less populated voting districts were over-represented, while heavily populated districts were under represented.
Baker sought a judgment declaring the 1901 law unconstitutional and requested an injunction against the State enjoining it from conducting future elections under that law.
Case Citation:
Baker v. Carr, 369 US 186 (1962)
For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Baker won the case.
The citation for Baker v. Carr is 369 U.S. 186 (1962). This landmark U.S. Supreme Court case dealt with the issue of legislative apportionment and the principle of "one person, one vote."
Baker v. Carr, (1962) was the first of a series of Supreme Court cases of the early 60s that established the federal judiciary's right to determine the constitutionality of legislative districting within a state (the allocation of state and federal representatives to voters).Justice William Brennan was the driving force behind the decision in Baker v. Carr, not Chief Justice Earl Warren.Brennan believed the case rested on the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause, which allowed the federal courts to hear the case.Case Citation:Baker v. Carr, 369 US 186 (1962)
Charles W. Baker and other Tennessee voters were the petitioners (like a plaintiff) and Tennessee Secretary of State Joe C. Carr was the nominal respondent (like a defendant) in the case because his office was responsible for conducting elections, not because he or his office had been responsible for creating policy or voting districts. The Tennessee state legislature was being challenged, but Carr was sued ex officio in place of the state (which has sovereign immunity, per law).Case Citation:Baker v. Carr, 369 US 186 (1962)
Baker v. Carr (1962) and Shaw v. Reno (1993) are both landmark Supreme Court cases in the realm of redistricting. Baker v. Carr established the principle of "one person, one vote" which requires states to draw legislative districts with equal populations. Shaw v. Reno further clarified that race cannot be the predominant factor in drawing districts, setting limits on racial gerrymandering.
The Supreme Court decisions in Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims resulted in more equal representation. In Reynolds v. Sims, the court stated that state legislature districts had to be approximately equal in terms of population.
In law, "v." stands for "versus" (which is Latin for "against") in the title of a reported case. In the case of Able v. Baker, for example, Able has brought a lawsuit against Baker.
The political question in Baker v. Carr, (1962) was whether the US Supreme Court could interfere with the legislative branch of government to decide how voter apportionment maps could be drawn.The Supreme Court abandoned its position that voting district apportionment was a political question because the states (Tennessee, in this case) failed to draw district lines in a way that guaranteed equal representation to all voters. Bakerwas soon followed by two other cases addressing legislative representation, Reynolds v. Sims, 377 US 533 (1964) and Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 US 1 (1964).Case Citation:Baker v. Carr, 369 US 186 (1962)
Baker v. Carr, (1962) was the first of a series of Supreme Court cases of the early 60s that established the federal judiciary's right to determine the constitutionality of legislative districting within a state (the allocation of state and federal representatives to voters).Case Citation:Baker v. Carr, 369 US 186 (1962)
William V. Carr House was created in 1860.
Baker v. Carr (redistricting is a justiciable issue) Westbury v. Sanders (one man, one vote) Shaw v. Reno (race can't be only consideration in redistricting)
Gus Carr's birth name is Gustaro V. Carr.