This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: no such questions to be answered in this case and that legislative apportionment was a justiciable issue. In his opinion, Justice Brennan provided past examples in which the Court had intervened to correct constitutional violations in matters pertaining to state administration and the officers through whom state affairs are conducted. Brennan concluded that the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection issues which Baker and others raised in this case merited judicial evaluation. V. Dissent reasons VI. Concurring reasons Notes...
View Full Document
- Fall '09
- Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, legislative apportionment, significant economic growth, Amendment equal protection, Charles W. Baker, V. Dissent reasons