About: Colegrove v. Green     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : yago:WikicatLawsuits, within Data Space : dbpedia.org associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon
http://dbpedia.org/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FColegrove_v._Green

Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549 (1946), was a United States Supreme Court case. Writing for a 4-3 plurality, Justice Felix Frankfurter held that the federal judiciary had no power to interfere with issues regarding apportionment of state legislatures. The Court held that Article I, section IV of the U.S. Constitution left to the legislature of each state the authority to establish the time, place, and manner of holding elections for representatives, and that only Congress (and thus not the federal judiciary) could determine whether individual state legislatures had fulfilled their responsibility to secure fair representation for citizens.

AttributesValues
rdf:type
rdfs:label
  • Colegrove v. Green
rdfs:comment
  • Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549 (1946), was a United States Supreme Court case. Writing for a 4-3 plurality, Justice Felix Frankfurter held that the federal judiciary had no power to interfere with issues regarding apportionment of state legislatures. The Court held that Article I, section IV of the U.S. Constitution left to the legislature of each state the authority to establish the time, place, and manner of holding elections for representatives, and that only Congress (and thus not the federal judiciary) could determine whether individual state legislatures had fulfilled their responsibility to secure fair representation for citizens.
sameAs
dct:subject
Wikipage page ID
Wikipage revision ID
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
foaf:name
  • Colegrove et al. v. Green et al.
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
prov:wasDerivedFrom
has abstract
  • Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549 (1946), was a United States Supreme Court case. Writing for a 4-3 plurality, Justice Felix Frankfurter held that the federal judiciary had no power to interfere with issues regarding apportionment of state legislatures. The Court held that Article I, section IV of the U.S. Constitution left to the legislature of each state the authority to establish the time, place, and manner of holding elections for representatives, and that only Congress (and thus not the federal judiciary) could determine whether individual state legislatures had fulfilled their responsibility to secure fair representation for citizens. However, in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) the United States Supreme Court distinguished the Colegrove decision holding that malapportionment claims under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment were not exempt from judicial review under Article IV, Section 4, as the equal protection issue in this case was separate from any political questions. The "One Person, One Vote" doctrine which requires electoral districts to be apportioned according to population, thus making each district roughly equal in population, was further cemented in the cases that followed Baker v. Carr, including Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368 (1963) which concerned state county districts, Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964) which concerned state legislature districts, Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 (1964) which concerned U.S. Congressional districts and Avery v. Midland County, 390 U.S. 474 (1968) which concerned local government districts, a decision which was upheld in Board of Estimate of City of New York v. Morris, 489 U.S. 688 (1989).
ArgueYear
Concurrence
  • Rutledge
DecideDate
  • --06-10
DecideYear
Dissent
  • Black
Holding
  • The remedy for unfairness in districting is to secure State legislatures that will apportion properly, or to invoke the ample powers of Congress. The Constitution has many commands that are not enforceable by courts, because they clearly fall outside the conditions and purposes that circumscribe judicial action.
JoinDissent
  • Douglas, Murphy
LawsApplied
Litigants
  • Colegrove v. Green
NotParticipating
  • Jackson
Prior
  • Dismissed, 64 F.Supp. 632
SCOTUS
USPage
USVol
ArgueDateA
  • --03-07
ArgueDateB
  • --03-08
JoinPlurality
  • Reed, Burton
Overruled
  • Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 ; Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368 ; Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 ; Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 ; Avery v. Midland County, 390 U.S. 474 ; Board of Estimate of City of New York v. Morris, 489 U.S. 688
Plurality
  • Frankfurter
http://purl.org/voc/vrank#hasRank
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage of
Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git39 as of Aug 09 2019


Alternative Linked Data Documents: PivotViewer | iSPARQL | ODE     Content Formats:       RDF       ODATA       Microdata      About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3232 as of Aug 9 2019, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc25), Single-Server Edition (61 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2019 OpenLink Software