 | This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. (September 2024) |
| Baker v. Carr | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued April 19–20, 1961 Reargued October 9, 1961 Decided March 26, 1962 | |
| Full case name | Charles W. Baker et al. v. Joe. C. Carr et al. |
| Citations | 369 U.S. 186 (more) 82 S. Ct. 691; 7 L. Ed. 2d 663; 1962 U.S. LEXIS 1567 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 179 F. Supp. 824 (M.D. Tenn. 1959), probable jurisdiction noted, 364 U.S. 898 (1960). Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Subsequent | On remand, 206 F. Supp. 341 (M.D. Tenn. 1962) |
| Holding | |
| The redistricting of state legislative districts is not a political question. Therefore, cases related to the aforementioned are justiciable by the federal courts. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Brennan, joined by Warren, Black, Douglas, Clark, Stewart |
| Concurrence | Douglas |
| Concurrence | Clark |
| Concurrence | Stewart |
| Dissent | Frankfurter, joined by Harlan |
| Dissent | Harlan, joined by Frankfurter |
| Whittaker took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV; U.S. Const. art. III; 42 U.S.C. § 1983; Tenn. Const. art. II | |
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings | |
| Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549 (1946) (in part) | |
Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that redistricting qualifies as a justiciable question under the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause, thus enabling federal courts to hear Fourteenth Amendment-based redistricting cases. The court summarized its Baker holding in a later decision as follows: "the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment limits the authority of a State Legislature in designing the geographical districts from which representatives are chosen either for the State Legislature or for the Federal House of Representatives." (Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368 (1963)). The court had previously held in Gomillion v. Lightfoot that districting claims over racial discrimination could be brought under the Fifteenth Amendment.
The case arose from a lawsuit against the state of Tennessee, which had not conducted redistricting since 1901. Tennessee argued that the composition of legislative districts constituted a nonjusticiable political question, as the U.S. Supreme Court had held in Colegrove v. Green (1946). In a majority opinion joined by five other justices, Justice William J. Brennan Jr. held that redistricting did not qualify as a political question, though he remanded the case to the federal district court for further proceedings. Justice Felix Frankfurter strongly dissented, arguing that the Court's decision cast aside history and judicial restraint and violated the separation of powers between legislatures and courts.
The case did not have any immediate effect on electoral districts, but it set an important precedent regarding the power of federal courts to address redistricting. In 1964, the Supreme Court handed down two cases, Wesberry v. Sanders and Reynolds v. Sims, that required the United States House of Representatives and state legislatures to establish electoral districts of equal population on the principle of one person, one vote.