Citation network
Wesberry Vs. Sanders
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 17, 1964
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 1 (1964) U.S. Supreme Court Wesberry v. SandersSearch
-
U.S. 1 (1964) Wesberry v. SandersSearch
-
As in Baker v. CarrSearch
-
of the court dismissed the complaint, citing as their guide Mr. Justice Frankfurter's minority opinion in Colegrove v. GreenSearch
-
in the apportionment. He relied on Baker v. CarrSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
and decision by the District Court in light of existing circumstances. Page 376 U. S. 5 I Baker v. CarrSearch
-
widely varying numbers of people -- was precisely that which was alleged to debase votes for Congressmen in Colegrove v. GreenSearch
-
U. S. 355 , Koenig v. FlynnSearch
-
U. S. 375 , and Carroll v. BeckerSearch
-
rights of individuals from legislative destruction, a power recognized at least since our decision in Marbury v. MadisonSearch
-
votes of people living in more populous parts of the State, for example, the Fifth District around Atlanta. Cf. Gray v. SandersSearch
-
Article v. thatSearch
-
Article gives persons qualified to vote a constitutional right to vote and to have their votes counted. United States v. MosleySearch
-
be denied outright, it cannot, consistently with Article I, be destroyed by alteration of ballots, see United States v. ClassicSearch
-
U. S. 299 , or diluted by stuffing of the ballot box, see United States v. SaylorSearch
-
Cf. Gray v. SandersSearch
-
Wesberry v. VandiverSearch
-
of that case. Cook v. FortsonSearch
-
U.S. at 369 U. S. 232 . Cf. also Wood v. BroomSearch
-
districting is subject to judicial scrutiny. This Page 376 U. S. 19 Court has so held ever since Smiley v. HolmSearch
-
U. S. 355 (1932), which is buttressed by two companion cases, Koenig v. FlynnSearch
-
U. S. 375 (1932), and Carroll v. BeckerSearch
-
U. S. 380 (1932). A majority of the Court in Colegrove v. GreenSearch
-
Smiley, that the complaint presented a justiciable controversy not reserved exclusively to Congress. Colegrove v. GreenSearch
-
U. S. 549 , 328 U. S. 564 , and 328 U. S. 568 , n. 3 (1946). Again, in Baker v. CarrSearch
-
of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. As my Brother BLACK said in his dissent in Colegrove v. GreenSearch
-
Page 376 U. S. 20 on the merits. At that hearing, the court should apply the standards laid down in Baker v. CarrSearch
-
as a result of the order of the three-judge District Court in Toombs v. FortsonSearch
-
The legislative history of the 1929 Act is carefully reviewed in Wood v. BroomSearch
-
prosecuted as violations of federal statutes. The acts in question were filing false election returns, United States v. MosleySearch
-
U. S. 383 , alteration of ballots and false certification of votes, United States v. ClassicSearch
-
U. S. 299 , and stuffing the ballot box, United States v. SaylorSearch
-
Page 376 U. S. 47 The Court gives scant attention, and that not on the merits, to Colegrove v. GreenSearch
-
Id. at 328 U. S. 550 -551. Leaving to another day the question of what Baker v. CarrSearch
-
U. S. 355 , and its two companion cases, Koenig v. FlynnSearch
-
Brother CLARK relies in his separate opinion, ante pp. 376 U. S. 18 -19, are equally irrelevant. Smiley v. HolmSearch
-
of Congress in enacting the 1929 Act. See id. at 376 U. S. 374 . Quite obviously, therefore, Smiley v. HolmSearch
-
elections in disregard, and even in contradiction, of congressional purpose. The companion cases to Smiley v. HolmSearch
-
The Court relies in part on Baker v. CarrSearch
-
The quotation is from Mr. Justice Rutledge's concurring opinion in Colegrove v. GreenSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial