Baker v. Carr

Baker v. Carr Summary

The legislative branch in America is a bicameral legislature. The population of the House of Representatives is determined by each state’s population, with the total number of representatives set at 435. The number of senators is always 100, and each state receives two. The bicameral legislature is a result of the Great Compromise of 1787. The Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan were combined into one legislative body that reflects the desires of both large and small states.

So, how do we know how many representatives each state should receive? Every ten years, a census is carried out, and the country's entire population is counted. Once the population of each state is counted, reapportionment may occur. If a population goes up or down, a state may gain or lose representation. After reapportionment, state legislatures must draw new districts in a process known as redistricting, and the party in power most often draws the district lines to benefit their party.

Before 1962, the Supreme Court had stayed out of disagreements regarding the redistricting process. Redistricting has a tremendous amount of influence on participation in democracy and who gains power in the House of Representatives. Therefore, legislative redistricting was seen as a political matter left to the states. However, in 1962, the landmark decision in Baker v. Carr paved the way for federal courts to rule in cases regarding the way states draw their legislative boundaries.

Who was Charles Baker?

Charles Baker was a resident of Shelby County (Memphis), Tennessee. Even though the population of the state had changed, Tennessee had not changed its legislative districts since the 1900 census. In addition to an increase in population, Tennessee experienced a shift in population as well. More people moved to urban areas, such as Shelby County. As a result, a heavily populated area, such as Shelby County, had one representative, and counties with far fewer people also had one representative.

Baker believed that his constitutional rights were violated by unfair representation. The 14th Amendment promises equal protection of the laws. Baker felt that his vote was being devalued because rural areas had lower citizen-representative ratios. His and other urban voters' voices were being diluted.

Baker sued the state officials (Secretary of State Carr) in charge of elections in the U.S. District Court, a federal court. The state of Tennessee said the issue was outside the jurisdiction of federal courts. His complaint was dismissed, and Baker appealed to the Supreme Court. They decided to hear the case.

Issue

The question the Court had to decide was: Do federal courts have the power to decide in cases regarding the constitutionality of state legislative redistricting?

Arguments for Baker

• Article III reads: “the judicial power shall extend to all Cases, in law and equity, arising under.” Obviously, the federal courts should be able to render judgment on this issue.

• Just because an issue involves politics doesn’t mean it’s necessarily a “political question” that the Courts can involve themselves with.

• Just because Courts have stayed out of state redistricting in the past doesn’t mean that’s good practice. Tradition isn’t a good enough excuse to stay out of something that is so central to democratic participation.

• Charles Baker’s 14th Amendment rights have been violated.

Arguments for Carr

• Federal Courts do not have the authority to hear cases regarding state legislative districts.

• If the Court rules in this matter, it will be an overreach and abuse of power. Tennessee should be able to determine whether its districts are fair.

• There is nothing in the Constitution that says that legislative districts have to have the same number of people.

• If the residents of Tennessee believe that their state legislature is drawing districts unfairly, it’s up to them to encourage their elected officials to make the change.

Fig. 1, Supreme Court of the United States, Wikimedia Commons

Baker v. Carr Ruling

In a 6-2 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled for Baker. The majority opinion was written by Justice Brennan, and he was joined in the majority by Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice Black. Concurring opinions were written by Justices Clark, Douglas, and Stewart.

The majority held that federal courts have the authority to decide cases that involve equal protection of the laws. Justice Brennan wrote,

Fig 2. Chief Justice Earl Warren, Wikipedia

Baker v. Carr Dissenting Opinion

Justices Frankfurter and Harlan dissented and wrote that the Court should abide by precedent and continue to refuse to render decisions regarding a state’s districts. Harlan wrote,

Baker v. Carr Significance

Baker v. Carr is a significant Supreme Court case because it gave the federal courts the authority to hear cases regarding constitutional violations that may occur when state legislatures draw district boundaries. The decision was a break from tradition and precedent and opened the door for the Court to rule in a significant number of cases involving equal protection and redistricting.

Baker v. Carr Impact

Chief Justice Earl Warren served on the Supreme Court from 1953-1969 and oversaw numerous landmark decisions that dealt with the protection of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. After he retired, he remarked that Baker v. Carr was the most important case of his career. Baker v. Carr helped to establish the principle of “one person – one vote” that expanded fair democratic participation and helped to protect the voting rights of minority groups.

Fig. 3 One Man, One Vote Protest Sign at 1964 Democratic National Convention, Wikimedia Commons