Explain why the Baker v. Carr case and the Westbury v. Sanders cases had such a tremendous effect on the development of the concept of “one man, one vote.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Carr
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesberry_v._Sanders
The Baker v. Carr case and the Westbury v. Sanders cases had a significant impact on the development of the concept of "one man, one vote" because they established key principles that reshaped the way legislative districts were apportioned in the United States.
To understand why these cases were so influential, let's start with some background. Prior to these cases, many state legislatures had apportioned their districts in a way that favored rural areas over urban areas. This resulted in a situation where voters in rural districts had more political power than voters in urban districts, even though the populations of the two districts might be similar. This method of apportionment, known as "malapportionment," was seen as unfair and undemocratic.
Baker v. Carr, decided by the Supreme Court in 1962, was the first case that tackled the issue of malapportionment head-on. It involved the state of Tennessee, where the voters of urban areas argued that their representation in the state legislature had been diluted, violating the principle of equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment.
In its decision, the Supreme Court held that questions of legislative apportionment were not purely political and could be reviewed by the courts. This ruling established the principle that the federal courts had the authority to review claims of vote dilution and ensure that electoral districts adhered to the "one man, one vote" principle.
Westbury v. Sanders, decided by the Supreme Court in 1964, further solidified the "one man, one vote" concept. This case involved a challenge to Georgia's congressional districts, which were highly disproportionate in terms of population. One district had less than half the population of another district, yet both had the same representation in Congress.
The Supreme Court held that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment required that each citizen's vote should carry equal weight, regardless of where they resided. The Court ruled that unless the state could justify the population differences between districts based on a rational reason, such as geographic lines or other legitimate factors, the districts were deemed unconstitutional.
These landmark decisions established the constitutional principle of "one man, one vote" and established guidelines for the equal apportionment of legislative districts. They had a tremendous effect on the development of this concept because they dismantled the longstanding practice of malapportionment, which undermined the democratic principle of equal representation.
In the aftermath of these cases, many states had to redraw their district lines to ensure that each district had a roughly equal population. This led to a more proportional representation that more accurately reflected the will of the people. The principles set forth in Baker v. Carr and Westbury v. Sanders continue to influence how electoral districts are apportioned today, helping to ensure fair and equal representation for all citizens.