Which case opened the door to equal protection challenges to redistricting?

Which case opened the door to equal protection challenges to redistricting?

• A. Brown v. Board of Education
• B. Shaw v. Reno
• C. Baker v. Carr
• D. Citizens United v. FEC

Answer: (C)

Courts can review how legislative districts are drawn under the Equal Protection Clause. Baker v. Carr established that apportionment of state legislative districts is a justiciable issue, meaning the judiciary can hear and decide these disputes rather than dismissing them as nonjusticiable political questions. By holding that malapportionment claims could be evaluated under equal protection, the Court enabled challenges arguing that votes have unequal weight when districts are drawn with uneven populations. This laid the groundwork for the “one person, one vote” principle that state and federal courts would enforce in redistricting, a standard sharpened in Reynolds v. Sims. While later cases like Shaw v. Reno address racial considerations in districting, Baker v. Carr is the pivotal starting point that opened the door to equal protection challenges to how districts are drawn.

Courts can review how legislative districts are drawn under the Equal Protection Clause. Baker v. Carr established that apportionment of state legislative districts is a justiciable issue, meaning the judiciary can hear and decide these disputes rather than dismissing them as nonjusticiable political questions. By holding that malapportionment claims could be evaluated under equal protection, the Court enabled challenges arguing that votes have unequal weight when districts are drawn with uneven populations. This laid the groundwork for the “one person, one vote” principle that state and federal courts would enforce in redistricting, a standard sharpened in Reynolds v. Sims. While later cases like Shaw v. Reno address racial considerations in districting, Baker v. Carr is the pivotal starting point that opened the door to equal protection challenges to how districts are drawn.