Baker v Carr

Baker v. Carr

• Charles W. Baker- Plantiff
• Joe C. Carr- Defendent
• Started April 19th-20th of 1961
• Reargued on October 9th of 1961
• Ended/Decided on March 26th of 1962

What events lead to this court case?

• Tennessee had a law that said all towns are required to provide population statistics every 10 years. In the early 1900's populations grew and more people came into Tennessee. Tennessee still had the same amount of political representation as rural districts with a much lower population. In 1960, roughly two-thirds of Tennessee’s representatives were being elected by one-third of the state’s population. A group of voters wanted more equal representation.

What historical issues were facing the us?

• On January 20 1961, J.F.K became president. June 27, 1969 police raided the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in New York City. The bar’s patrons fought back. It lasted 5 days. The war in Vietnam was the government's first priority but, there was not enough money. In 1964, congress authorized the president to take “ all necessary measures” to protect American Soldiers and their Allies from communists Viet Cong. After a few days the draft started. The struggle for Civil Rights was an issue until 1964 when President Johnson pushed a Civil Rights Act through Congress that prohibited discrimination in public places, Gave the Justice department permission to sue states that discriminated women and minorities.

Who was the challenger and who appealed?

• Charles Baker claimed that Tennessee Did not follow the law to provide population statistics to the state every 10 years. Baker filed suit against the Secretary of State Joe Carr. Saying that Tennessee has not redistricted since 1901. The court said that Tennessee refusing to follow the law of remapping the districts was in direct violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. This clause forces every individual citizen of the United States to be treated equally and without bias with regard to their pursuit of happiness. The Federal Court refused to enter the “ political thicket” of state districting , so the case was appealed to the supreme court.

Majority Opinion (Vote)

• Justice William J. Brennan Jr. wrote, "The majority of the 14th Amendments equal protection clause was valid grounds to bring a reappointment lawsuit."
• The Supreme Court voted 6-2 for Baker. They held that federal courts have the power to determine the constitutionality of a State's voting districts.
• Brennan argued that the case did not involve a "political question" that prevented judicial review.

Constitutional basis for ruling

• The court held that there was no such questions to be answered in this case and that legislative apportionment was a justifiable issure.
• The appellants brought suit challenging malapportionment of state legislatures under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment"

The Dissenting Opinion

• Frankfurter Joined by John marshall II, argued saying that the court has cast aside history and judicial restraint, and violated the separation of powers between legislatures and courts. Justice John Harlan II argued that the federal equal protection clause does not present a state “ from choosing any electoral legislature structure it thinks best suited to the interest and customs of its people”.

Concurring Opinion

• Justice Douglas wrote a concurring opinion where he declared that if a voter no longer has the “full constitutional value of his franchise (right to vote)”, and the legislative branch fails to take appropriate restorative action, the doors of the courts must be open to him.