Baker v. Carr

The Court held that legislative apportionment claims are justiciable, opening federal courts to one person one vote challenges.

Overview

Tennessee had not redrawn state legislative districts since 1901, leaving rural voters vastly overrepresented compared to growing cities. Justice Brennan, for the majority, held that such equal protection challenges present a political question that courts can adjudicate, clearing away the barriers that had kept malapportionment beyond judicial review. Baker paved the way for Reynolds v. Sims and the one person one vote principle, ending the dominance of malapportioned rural legislatures and fundamentally redrawing American political geography as urban and suburban voters gained legislative power commensurate with their numbers.