0
Want this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Who won Baker v Carr?
Baker won the case.
What is the citation of Baker v Carr?
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."
What are some statements describing Earl Warren's reasoning in the Baker v Carr case?
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)
Who were the parties in the Baker v Carr case?
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)
How are baker v carr and shaw v Reno synonomous?
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.
What resulted from the supreme court decisions in Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims?
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.
What is v in technical writing?
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.
What was the political question in Baker v Carr?
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)
What famous case makes all congressional districts in a state have the same number of people so that one person's vote is equal to another's?
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)
Who won in the Rhodes v Chapman supreme court case?
chapman won the supreme court case
When was William V. Carr House created?
William V. Carr House was created in 1860.
What are the landmark us supreme court cases on redistricting?
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)
