Political Rights

Question 1

Baker v. Carr (1962)

Answer 1

Baker and other Tennessee citizens alleged that a 1901 law designed to apportion the seats for the state’s General Assembly was virtually ignored. Baker’s suit detailed how Tennessee’s reapportionment efforts ignored significant economic growth and population shifts within the state. The Supreme Court ruled that redistricting of state legislative districts is not a political question, and thus is justiciable by the federal courts.

Question 2

Davis v. Bandemer (1986)

Answer 2

A group of Democrats challenged Indiana’s 1981 state apportionment scheme on the ground of political gerrymandering. The Democrats argued that the apportionment unconstitutionally diluted their votes in important districts, violating their rights. The Supreme Court ruled that claims of partisan gerrymandering were within the judiciary’s remit