Explain the significance of "one person, one vote" in determining U.S. policy; Discuss how voter participation affects politics in the United States; . Since population growth in the state over the next 60 years was uneven, the plaintiffs alleged that residents of Jefferson County were seriously underrepresented at the state level. Learn about the Supreme Court case, Reynolds v. Sims. The decision in Wesberry, which concerned federal election districts, was based on Article I of the Constitution, which governs the federal legislative branch. - Definition, Uses & Effects, Class-Based System: Definition & Explanation, What is a First World Country? In Reynolds v. Sims (1964) the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states must create legislative districts that each have a substantially equal number of voters to comply with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari. In this lesson, we will learn if a voter has a right to equal representation under the U.S. Constitution. In Reynolds v. Sims, the Court was presented with two issues: The Supreme Court held that the apportionment issue concerning Alabama's legislature was justiciable. 23. In Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1879), the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a federal law prohibiting polygamy did not violate the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. For example, say the House of Representative changed their floor rules and a representative challenged the rules in court. Instead, the issues were being left open due to the Court's reluctance to avoid the problem. What is Reynolds v. 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. However, the court found that the issue was justiciable and that the 14th amendment rights of Alabama residents were being violated. Warren held that "legislators represent people, not trees or acres. The rules of the House are a purely political matter, and it would be unlikely that any ruling from the Supreme Court would settle the question. The 1901 Alabama Constitution provided for a house of representatives comprising no more than 105 members (with an exception provided for new counties, each of which would be entitled to at least one representative). The Court's decision in Wesberry v. Sanders (1964), which invalidated Georgia's unequal congressional districts, articulated the principle of equal representation for equal numbers of people. This means that individuals are guaranteed the same rights and liberties, regardless of minor or irrelevant differences between them. Reynolds claimed that the meaning of the article requires a reapportionment every time the census is taken. The Supreme Court began what came to be known as the reapportionment revolution with its opinion in the 1962 case, Baker v. Carr. Within two years, the boundaries of legislative districts had been redrawn all across the nation. Reynolds v. Sims (1964) Summary [Reynolds v. Sims 377 U.S. 533 (1964)] was a U.S Supreme Court that decided that Alabama's legislative apportionment was unconstitutional because it violated the 14th Amendment's Equal protection clause of the U.S constitution. Once you finish this lesson, you should be able to: Once you finish this lesson, you should be able to: Give the year that Reynolds v. Dilution of a persons vote infringes on his or her right of suffrage. The Equal Protection Clause requires a States legislature to represent all citizens as equally as possible. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. The reason for a non-population-based Federal Senate has more to do with a compromise that allowed for the creation of a national government. Reynolds v. Sims was one that sought to challenge the apportionment schemes of Alabama and came to court seeking a remedy. Reynolds v. Sims is a famous legal case that reached the United States Supreme Court in 1964. In Reynolds v. Sims (1964), using the Supreme Court's precedent set in Baker v.Carr (1962), Warren held that representation in state legislatures must be apportioned equally on the basis of population rather than geographical areas, remarking that "legislators represent people, not acres or trees." In Miranda v. Arizona (1966)a landmark decision of the Warren court's rulings on . The districts adhered to existing county lines. Reynolds v. Sims: Summary, Decision & Significance Instructor: Kenneth Poortvliet Kenneth has a JD, practiced law for over 10 years, and has taught criminal justice courses as a full-time. if(document.getElementsByClassName("reference").length==0) if(document.getElementById('Footnotes')!==null) document.getElementById('Footnotes').parentNode.style.display = 'none'; Communications: Alison Graves Carley Allensworth Abigail Campbell Sarah Groat Caitlin Vanden Boom 2. After specifying a temporary reapportionment plan, the district court stated that the 1962 election of state legislators could only be conducted according to its plan. Click here to contact us for media inquiries, and please donate here to support our continued expansion. As we know that federal law is superior to that of the states. After Reynolds v. Sims, districts were redrawn so that they would include equal numbers of voters. In response, the Court then applied the one person, one vote rule for redistricting and reapportionment issues. https://www.thoughtco.com/reynolds-v-sims-4777764 (accessed March 4, 2023). Further stating that the equal protection clause wasnot designed for representatives whom represent all citizens to be greater or less. Create an account to start this course today. Along with Baker v.Carr (1962) and Reynolds v. Sims (1964), it was part of a series of Warren Court cases that applied the principle of "one person, one vote" to U.S. legislative bodies. The federal district court, unsatisfied with Alabamas proposals to remedy the representation problem, ordered temporary. Redressability, where the individual suffering from the injury can be aided by some type of compensation dependent on a ruling by the court. It concluded by saying both houses of Alabamas bicameral legislature be apportioned on a population basis. 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 . Definition and Examples, Katzenbach v. Morgan: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact, Browder v. Gayle: Court Case, Arguments, Impact, Obergefell v. Hodges: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impacts, Bolling v. Sharpe: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact. All Rights Reserved Reynolds was a resident of Jefferson County, Alabama. [] Undoubtedly, the right of suffrage is a fundamental matter in a free and democratic society. The dissent strongly accused the Court of repeatedly amending the Constitution through its opinions, rather than waiting for the lawful amendment process: "the Court's action now bringing them (state legislative apportionments) within the purview of the Fourteenth Amendment amounts to nothing less than an exercise of the amending power by this Court." 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.". copyright 2003-2023 Study.com. The decision of the District Court for the Middle District of Alabama is affirmed, and remanded. The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment mandates that individual states work to provide equal protection, which means that governing occurs without bias and that lone individual differences are unimportant when considering citizens. Reynolds v. Sims 1964. After 60 years of significant population growth, some areas of the State had grown in population far more than others. It should be noted that Alabamas legislative apportionment scheme gave more weight to citizens of some areas, mostly rural areas. [2], Chief Justice Earl Warren, writing for the court, argued that Alabama's apportionment system violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. She also has a Bachelor's of Science in Biological Sciences from California University. Reynolds v. Sims is a case decided on June 15, 1964, by the United States Supreme Court holding that state legislative districts should be made up of equal populations. But say 20 years later, your county tripled in population but still had the same number of representatives as your neighbor. Further, the District Courts remedy was appropriate because it gave the State an opportunity to fix its own system of apportionment. The Supreme Court came about an 8-to-1 vote in favor of Reynolds, which Chief Justice Earl Warren stated in the majority opinion. Whether the issue of the apportionment of Alabama's legislature, having been alleged to violate the 14th Amendment, is a justiciable issue. Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the 8-1 decision. In another case, Wesberry v. Sanders, the Court applied the one person, one vote principle to federal districts for electing members of the House of Representatives. 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. Interns wanted: Get paid to help ensure that every voter has unbiased election information. The Court decided each case individually, but it announced the controlling philosophy behind the decisions in Reynolds v. Sims. Several groups of voters, in separate lawsuits, challenged the constitutionality of the apportionment of the Alabama Legislature. (2020, August 28). 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. Because the number of representatives for each district remained the same over those 60 years, some voters in the State had a greater voice in government than others. Gray v. Sanders gave rise to the phrase "one person, one vote," which became the motto of the reapportionment revolution. The constitution required that no county be divided between two senatorial districts and that no district comprise two or more counties not contiguous to one another. All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. The plaintiffs alleged that reapportionment had not occurred in Alabama since the adoption of the 1901 Alabama Constitution. In the case, plaintiffs in Jefferson County, Alabama sued the state in 1961, alleging that Alabama's continued use of . [6], Voters from Jefferson County, Alabama, home to the state's largest city of Birmingham, challenged the apportionment of the Alabama Legislature. The case of Reynolds v. Sims arose after voters in Birmingham, Alabama, challenged the apportionment of the Alabama Legislature; the Constitution of Alabama provided for one state senator per county regardless of population differences. Justice John Harlan II wrote a dissenting opinion. Voters from Jefferson County, Alabama challenged the apportionment structure of their State House and Senate, which required each county to have at least one representative, regardless of size. It devised a reapportionment plan and passed an amendment providing for home rule to counties. [12] He warned that: [T]he forces of our national life are not brought to bear on public questions solely in proportion to the weight of numbers. Its like a teacher waved a magic wand and did the work for me. Reynolds and other voters in Jefferson County, Alabama, challenged the state's legislative apportionment for representatives. Reynolds contended that the districts needed to be redrawn since they had remained the same since 1901. Legislators are elected by voters, not farms or cities or economic interests." The Fourteenth Amendment does not allow this Court to impose the equal population rule in State elections. O'Gorman & Young, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth, City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. Reynolds v. Sims (1964) Case Summary. Denise DeCooman was a teaching assistant for the General Zoology course at California University of Pennsylvania while she earned her Master's of Science in Clinical Mental Health Counseling from fall semester of 2015 and spring of 2017. They were based on rational state policy that took geography into account, according to the state's attorneys. 320 lessons. That, coupled with the importance of ensuring all votes are counted equally, makes the issue justiciable. [4][5], On August 26, 1961, the plaintiffs in the suit, a group of voters residing in Jefferson County, Alabama, filed suit in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama. Reynolds alleged that Jefferson County had grown considerably while other counties around it hadn't, which created an unequal apportionment since Jefferson County had the same number of representatives as the other counties. The district courts judgement was affirmed. Under the Court's new decree, California could be dominated by Los Angeles and San Francisco; Michigan by Detroit. State officials appealed, arguing that the existing and proposed reapportionment plans are constitutional, and that the district court lacked the power to order temporary reapportionment. 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.