Baker v. Carr: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=U.S. Supreme Court |citation=369 U.S. 186 (1962) |date=1962 |subject=Constitutional Law }} '''Issues''' Whether an equal protection challenge to...") |
(Voting case) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|date=1962 | |date=1962 | ||
|subject=Constitutional Law | |subject=Constitutional Law | ||
|other_subjects=Voting; Congress | |||
|case_treatment=No | |||
}} | }} | ||
'''Issues''' | '''Issues''' | ||
| Line 18: | Line 20: | ||
Issues involving political questions | Issues involving political questions | ||
* a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department | *a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department | ||
* a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it | *a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it | ||
* the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly nonjudicial discretion | *the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly nonjudicial discretion | ||
* the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government | *the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government | ||
* an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made | *an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made | ||
* the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question | *the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question | ||
'''Dissent''' | '''Dissent''' | ||
The present case involves all the elements which have made the Guarantee Clause cases non-justiciable. | The present case involves all the elements which have made the Guarantee Clause cases non-justiciable. | ||
Revision as of 17:01, June 26, 2022
| Baker v. Carr | |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
|---|---|
| Citation | 369 U.S. 186 (1962) |
| Date decided | 1962 |
Issues
Whether an equal protection challenge to malapportionment of state legislatures is a non-justiciable political question.
Holding/Decision
Apportionment cases can involve no federal constitutional right except one resting on the guaranty of a republican form of government, and complaints based on that clause have been held to present political questions which are non-justiciable.
Rules
Issues involving political questions
- a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department
- a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it
- the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly nonjudicial discretion
- the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government
- an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made
- the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question
Dissent
The present case involves all the elements which have made the Guarantee Clause cases non-justiciable.
