M.O. It was argued that it was unnecessary for the Supreme Court to interfere with how states apportioned their legislative districts, and that the 14th Amendment rights of Alabama voters were not being violated. In an 8-to-1 ruling, it was found that the case of Reynolds v. Sims was justiciable, or had standing, because it was not purely of political concern. https://www.thoughtco.com/reynolds-v-sims-4777764 (accessed March 4, 2023). When Reynolds v. Sims was argued, it had been over sixty years since their last update to the apportionment of elected representatives. Reynolds v. Sims (1964) Case Summary. The reaction to the decision was so strong that a United States senator tried to pass a constitutional amendment that would allow states to draw districts based on geography rather than population. They alleged that the legislature had not reapportioned house and senate seats since 1901, despite a large increase in Alabama's population. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the electoral districts of state legislative chambers must be roughly equal in population. Reynolds v. Sims is a landmark case, 377 U.S. 533, 84 S. Ct. 1362, 12 L. Ed. Justice Tom C. Clark wrote a concurring opinion. States may have to balance representation based on population with other legislative goals like ensuring minority representation. --Chief Justice Earl Warren on the right to vote as the foundation of democracy in Reynolds v. Sims (1964).[11]. Equal Protection as guaranteed by the 5th and 14th amendments require broadly that each person be treated equally in their voting power, but what equality means relies on a series of Supreme Court cases. The federal district court, unsatisfied with Alabamas proposals to remedy the representation problem, ordered temporary. Only the Amendment process can do that. The District Court was correct to come to that holding and to reject the States proposed apportionment plans. Baker v. Carr. Oyez. The case was decided on June 15, 1964. Further stating that the equal protection clause wasnot designed for representatives whom represent all citizens to be greater or less. The most relevant Supreme Court case is Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964). Reynolds v. Sims: Summary, Decision & Significance Without reapportionment, multiple districts were severely underrepresented. Gray v. Sanders gave rise to the phrase "one person, one vote," which became the motto of the reapportionment revolution. To read more about the impact of Reynolds v. Sims click here. Before Reynolds, urban counties nationwide often had total representations similar to rural counties, and in Florida, there was a limit to three representatives even for the most populous counties. To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member. The political question doctrine states that, when it is invoked, that a case is unable to be settled in the court of law if the issue it addresses stems from an essence that is merely political in its nature. The case of Reynolds v. Sims was ruled to be justiciable, which means that the legislative portion of the United States government had already voted on the issue regarding a similar which case, which renders the actual case to be moot, or not matter. Amendment by weighing some votes higher than another? Whatever may be thought of this holding as a piece of political ideology -- and even on that score, the political history and practices of this country from its earliest beginnings leave wide room for debate -- I think it demonstrable that the Fourteenth Amendment does not impose this political tenet on the States or authorize this Court to do so. The Court said that these cases defeat the required element in a non-justiciable case that the Court is unable to settle the issue. Operations: Meghann Olshefski Mandy Morris Kelly Rindfleisch The plaintiffs requested a declaration that "establishing the present apportionment of seats in the Alabama Legislature, were unconstitutional under the Alabama and Federal Constitutions, and an injunction against the holding of future elections for legislators until the legislature reapportioned itself in accordance with the State Constitution. 1, Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney, Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan. In order to be considered justiciable, a case must be considered to be more than just political in essence. Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 (1964), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that districts in the United States House of Representatives must be approximately equal in population. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. Whether the issue of the apportionment of Alabama's legislature, having been alleged to violate the 14th Amendment, is a justiciable issue. Reynolds believed that, due to the population growth in the county where he lived and what was written in the state constitution of Alabama, there were not enough elected officials acting as representatives for the area. Therefore, having some votes weigh less than others just because of where a person lives violates equal protection of the laws. Baker v. Carr held that federal courts are able to rule on the constitutionality of the relative size of legislative districts. ", "Landmark Cases: Reynolds v. Sims (1964)", California Legislative District Maps (1911Present), Lucas v. Forty-Fourth Gen. Acknowledging the Court's long standing desire to stay away from the political power struggles within the state governments, the Court noted that since its decision in Baker v. Carr, there have been several cases filed across the country regarding the dilution of voters' rights due to inequitable apportionment. and its Licensors Reynolds v. Sims and Baker v. Carr have been heralded as the most important cases of the 1960s for their effect on legislative apportionment. When the Court applied this rule to Alabama's then-current apportionment, it ruled that their unequal apportionment violated the voters' equal protection rights protection under the 14th Amendment. It is known as the "one person, one vote" case. Yes. Justice Harlan argued that the majority had ignored the legislative history of the Fourteenth Amendment. united states - Does the Senate violate Reynolds v Sims? - Politics The court held that Once the geographical boundaries of a district are set, all who participate in that election have an equal vote no matter their sex, race, occupation, or geographical unit. Its like a teacher waved a magic wand and did the work for me. In addition, the majority simply denied the argument that states were permitted to base their apportionment structures upon the Constitution itself, which requires two senators from each state despite substantially unequal populations among the states. - Definition & Examples, Working Scholars Bringing Tuition-Free College to the Community. The Supreme Court came about an 8-to-1 vote in favor of Reynolds, which Chief Justice Earl Warren stated in the majority opinion. The decision held by the court in this case stemmed mainly from a constitutional right to suffrage. The case was brought by a group of Alabama voters who alleged that the apportionment of Alabama's state legislature violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to United States Constitution. Sounds fair, right? 2d 506 (1964), in which the U.S. Supreme Court established the principle of one person, one vote based on the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. Wesberry v. Sanders - Wikipedia Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1963 to 1972Reynolds v. Sims - Significance, "legislators Represent People, Not Trees", The Census, Further Readings, Copyright 2023 Web Solutions LLC. Spitzer, Elianna. As a result of the decision, almost every state had to redraw its legislative districts, and power . Earl Warren | chief justice of United States | Britannica This system failed to take population size into account, leading to huge discrepancies between district . In the case of Baker v. Carr, the court heard the argument for whether or not the Supreme Court had the right to redistrict legislative offices considering population changes in legislative districts. If the 14th Amendment rights of Alabama residents were being violated due to the unequally proportioned representatives in different legislative districts in Alabama. Reynolds v. Sims is famous for, and has enshrined, the one person, one vote principle. Prior to the case, numerous state legislative chambers had districts containing unequal populations; for example, in the Nevada Senate, the smallest district had 568 people, while the largest had approximately 127,000 people. Argued November 13, 1963. Section 2. Reynolds v. Sims legal definition of Reynolds v. Sims After Reynolds v. Sims, districts were redrawn so that they would include equal numbers of voters. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. You have more people now, pay more in taxes and have more issues that need representation, so shouldn't you get more representatives? Reynolds v. Sims and Baker v. Carr, have become known as the cases that established "one person, one vote." Reynolds v. Sims | Oyez - {{meta.fullTitle}} Requiring states to employ honest and good faith practices when creating districts. Create an account to start this course today. Jefferson County, with a population of more than 600,000 received seven seats in the Alabama House of Representatives and one seat in the Senate, while Bullock County, with a population of more than 13,000 received two seats in the Alabama House of Representatives and one seat in the Senate. State officials appealed, arguing that Alabamas existing and proposed reapportionment plans are constitutional and that the District Court lacked the power to reapportion the Legislature itself. Create an account to start this course today. State representatives represent people, not geographic regions. Reynolds v. Sims (1964) - LII / Legal Information Institute Creating fair and effective representation is the main goal of legislative reapportionment and, as a result, the Equal Protection Clause guarantees the "opportunity for equal participation by all voters in the election of state legislators.". Create your account. Justices struck down three apportionment plans for Alabama that would have given more weight to voters in rural areas than voters in cities. The Alabama legislature convened that month for an extraordinary session. They adopted two reapportionment plans that would take effect after the 1966 election. Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the 8-1 decision. I feel like its a lifeline.