Baker v carr summary. Baker v Carr Flashcards 2022-12-11
Baker v carr summary
Rating:
8,7/10
860
reviews
A research essay is a form of academic writing that requires the student to investigate a topic, collect and analyze evidence, and present their findings in a clear and concise manner. In order to write a successful research essay, it is important to follow a clear and organized outline.
Here is a brief outline for a research essay:
I. Introduction
- Introduce the topic and provide some background information
- State the purpose of the essay and the research question or thesis statement
- Outline the structure of the essay
II. Literature Review
- Summarize the existing research on the topic
- Identify gaps in the literature and areas for further investigation
- Explain how the current study will contribute to the existing body of knowledge
III. Methodology
- Describe the research design and methodology used to collect and analyze data
- Explain how the research question will be answered or the hypothesis tested
- Outline any limitations or biases in the study
IV. Results
- Present the findings of the study in a clear and concise manner
- Use tables, graphs, and other visual aids to illustrate the results
- Explain the implications of the findings
V. Discussion
- Interpret the results in relation to the research question or hypothesis
- Discuss the limitations of the study and the implications of the findings
- Provide recommendations for future research
VI. Conclusion
- Summarize the main points of the essay
- Restate the research question or thesis statement
- Conclude with a statement about the implications of the study
By following this outline, you can ensure that your research essay is well-organized and effectively communicates your findings to your readers. It is also important to remember to properly cite all sources and use a consistent citation style throughout your essay.
Baker vs Carr summary
The Supreme Court reversed, determining that because the claims were not derivative of the Guaranty Clause of Article IV, but rather the 14 th Amendment, that simply the implication of political rights did not render an issue inappropriate for judicial review. The Page 293 charter government denied the validity of the convention, the constitution and its government and, after an insignificant skirmish, routed Dorr and his followers. The complaint alleges that the 1901 statute effects an apportionment that deprives the appellants of the equal protection of the laws in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. You may not under any circumstances commence or maintain against us any class action, class arbitration, or other representative action or proceeding. Justice Johnson, concurring, found the controversy nonjusticiable, and would have put the ruling solely on this ground, id. Describing previous cases as "disorderly" in their presentation of the political question doctrine, Brennan sets forth the rules for determining when a case involves a "political question"—rules that exclude Baker v.
Next
Baker v. Carr :: 369 U.S. 186 (1962) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center
The judgment of the District Court is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Green and other decisions of this Court on which it relied. And so long as there exists a possible rational legislative policy for retaining an existing apportionment, such a legislative decision cannot be said to breach the bulwark against arbitrariness and caprice that the Fourteenth Amendment affords. However, in fairness I do think that Tennessee is entitled to have my idea of what it faces on the record before us and the trial court some light as to how it might proceed. My Brother HARLAN has, with imagination and ingenuity, hypothesized possibly rational bases for Tennessee's system.
Next
Baker V. Carr Summary
Connell, De Lima v. II as follows: "Sec. A federal court cannot 'pronounce any statute, either of a state or of the United States, void, because irreconcilable with the constitution, except as it is called upon to adjudge the legal rights of litigants in actual controversies. But in so doing, one is caught up in the backlash of his own bull whip, for many counties have municipalities with a population exceeding 10,000, yet the same invidious discrimination is present. We have here a phase of the recurring problem of the relation of the federal courts to state agencies. And see 15 Stat.
Next
Baker v. Carr
In all these cases, decision was by a full Court. Mosley, See also United States v. Acts of 1957, c. The Framers, carefully and with deliberate forethought, refused so to enthrone the judiciary. House of Representatives, Snowden v. Three justices—William Douglas, Tom Clark, and Potter Stewart—offered separate concurring opinions, while Felix Frankfurter and John Harlan II each dissented. The traditional test under the Equal Protection Clause has been whether a State has made 'an invidious discrimination,' as it does when it selects 'a particular race or nationality for oppressive treatment.
Next
Baker v. Carr
Some of those new plans were guided by federal court decisions. For the rights for the protection of which our authority is invoked are the rights of sovereignty, of political jurisdiction, of government, of corporate existence as a State, with all its constitutional powers and privileges. The Equal Protection Clause did not write an empty formalism into the Constitution. Despite a swell in population, certain urban areas were still receiving the same amount of representatives as rural areas with far less voters. The justiciability of the present claims being established, any relief accorded can be fashioned in the light of well known principles of equity. IV, § 4, in relation to congressional action.
Next
Baker v. Carr: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
The District Court's dismissal order recited that it was issued in conformity with the court's per curiam opinion. Pathe Exchange, Since the complaint plainly sets forth a case arising under the Constitution, the subject matter is within the federal judicial power defined in Art. Dissenting Opinion, Frankfurter Justice Felix Frankfurter 1882—1965 dissents, claiming that the court is overstepping its bounds. After an argument at the last Term, the case was set down for reargument, 366 U. Chambliss of Hamilton County , Resolution No. Specifically, we have said that such claims are not held nonjusticiable because they touch matters of state governmental organization. New York, London: Routledge.
Next
Baker v. Carr (1962)
The Court, through Mr. He was joined by Justice Hugo Black and Chief Justice Earl Warren. It would only darken counsel to discuss the relevance and significance of each of these assertedly distinguishing factors here and in the context of this entire line of cases. It would be ingenuous not to see, or consciously blind to deny, that the real battle over the initiative and referendum, or over a delegation of power to local rather than state-wide authority, is the battle between forces whose influence is disparate among the various organs of government to whom power may be given. In addition, population shifts had caused a dated apportionment of seats in the lower house to yield substantial numerical inequality of political influence, even among qualified voters.
Next
Baker v. Carr Plot Summary
Clark, see Leser v. Indeed, the courts of Rhode Island had in several cases held that "it rested with the political power to decide whether the charter government had been displaced or not," and that that department had acknowledged no change. Oregon, supra, the Court had no difficulty in "dispelling any mere confusion resulting from forms of expression and considering the substance of things. Smith on the ground that state judicial remedies had not been tried; Radford v. See Taylor and Marshall v. II, §§ 4 to 6; some excluded aliens, e.
Next