Baker v. Carr | Study Guide

United States Supreme Court

Download a PDF to print or study offline.

Study Guide
Cite This Study Guide

How to Cite This Study Guide

quotation mark graphic
MLA

Bibliography

Course Hero. "Baker v. Carr Study Guide." Course Hero. 21 Dec. 2018. Web. 22 Jan. 2019. <https://www.coursehero.com/lit/Baker-v-Carr/>.

In text

(Course Hero)

APA

Bibliography

Course Hero. (2018, December 21). Baker v. Carr Study Guide. In Course Hero. Retrieved January 22, 2019, from https://www.coursehero.com/lit/Baker-v-Carr/

In text

(Course Hero, 2018)

Chicago

Bibliography

Course Hero. "Baker v. Carr Study Guide." December 21, 2018. Accessed January 22, 2019. https://www.coursehero.com/lit/Baker-v-Carr/.

Footnote

Course Hero, "Baker v. Carr Study Guide," December 21, 2018, accessed January 22, 2019, https://www.coursehero.com/lit/Baker-v-Carr/.

Overview

Author

United States Supreme Court

Year Decided

1962

Type

Primary Source

Genre

U.S. Supreme Court Case

At a Glance

  • Tennessee's constitution, like most U.S. state constitutions, includes rules governing the conduct of elections. Among these is a stipulation that state representatives be reapportioned every 10 years to address population changes, a process known as redistricting.
  • Initially, the Tennessee legislature passed a new reapportionment law every decade. After 1901, however, the passage of such laws stopped, and the apportionment remained fixed for decades. By 1960 there was a serious mismatch between the populations of electoral districts and the number of representatives elected.
  • Claiming that their voting rights had been unconstitutionally "diluted," a group of Tennessee voters, including Charles W. Baker, sued the state to force a new reapportionment.
  • A district court found Baker's claim nonjusticiable—not testable in court. The Supreme Court disagreed, finding that matters relating to redistricting are justiciable.
  • In rendering its decision, the Supreme Court established broad jurisdiction for federal courts in matters of state electoral representation. Two years later, in Reynolds v. Sims (1964), this was codified as "one person, one vote."
  • Baker and Reynolds legitimized a state-by-state redrawing of electoral districts to decrease questionable disparities in voting strength. Since then state legislatures have often engaged in bitter partisan conflicts over how to implement the "one person, one vote" directive.

Summary

This study guide for United States Supreme Court's Baker v. Carr offers summary and analysis on themes, symbols, and other literary devices found in the text. Explore Course Hero's library of literature materials, including documents and Q&A pairs.

Buy this book from Amazon.com
Cite This Study Guide

information icon Have study documents to share about Baker v. Carr? Upload them to earn free Course Hero access!