This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: Use Baker v. Carr ; Goldwater v. Carter , and Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow to discuss judicial restraint and political questions doctrine. Baker v. Carr Represents a new direction in the doctrine of what is and is not a political question. In this case, the court determined that reapportionment of voting districts is in fact a justiciable question. Tennessee had not redrawn its voting districts since 1901, even though its state constitution required them to be redrawn every 10 years. Suing under the 14 th Amendment, Baker argued that because of a shift in population to urban areas, those in rural areas had a vote which was worth more than his own, and this violated equal protection of the law. Court agreed with Baker after a huge decision making process, and this case led to the infamous one-man, one-vote standard in a later case, Reynolds v. Sims. Six part test was developed for determining what is and is not a political question, as written by Brennan: 1. "Textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department;" as an example of this, 1....
View Full Document
- Fall '07