enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Baker v. Carr - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Carr

    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.

  3. One man, one vote - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_man,_one_vote

    However, in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) the United States Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren overturned the previous decision in Colegrove holding that malapportionment claims under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment were not exempt from judicial review under Article IV, Section 4, as the equal protection ...

  4. List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Warren Court

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States: 348 U.S. 272 (1955) Federal government did not owe Indian tribe compensation for timber taken from tribal-occupied lands in Alaska under the 5th Amendment: Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co. 348 U.S. 426 (1955) definition of taxable income: Williamson v. Lee: 348 U.S. 483 (1955) Due Process Clause, economic ...

  5. Voting rights in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_rights_in_the...

    In March 1962, the Warren Court ruled in Baker v. Carr (1962) that redistricting qualifies as a justiciable question, thus enabling federal courts to hear redistricting cases. [6] In February 1964, the Warren Court ruled in Wesberry v. Sanders (1964) that districts in the United States House of Representatives must be approximately equal in ...

  6. Article Four of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Four_of_the_United...

    The doctrine was later limited in Baker v. Carr (1962), which held that the lack of state legislative redistricting to be justiciable. [21] While the Supreme Court's holding in Luther v. Borden still holds today, the Court, by looking to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (adopted 19 years after Luther v.

  7. Equal Protection Clause - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause

    The first modern application of the Equal Protection Clause to voting law came in Baker v. Carr (1962), where the Court ruled that the districts that sent representatives to the Tennessee state legislature were so malapportioned (with some legislators representing ten times the number of residents as others) that they violated the Equal ...

  8. List of United States Supreme Court cases involving standing

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    Poe v. Ullman: 1961: Found a lack of standing to challenge a law banning contraceptives as it had never been enforced, and that the controversy was not yet ripe. The same law was successfully challenged four years later in Griswold v. Connecticut. 5–4 Baker v. Carr: 1962

  9. Felix Frankfurter - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Frankfurter

    In Baker v. Carr, Frankfurter's position was that the federal courts did not have the right to tell sovereign state governments how to apportion their legislatures; he thought the Supreme Court should not get involved in political questions, whether federal or local. [61] Frankfurter's view had won out in the 1946 case preceding Baker, Colegrove v.