Summary

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Moody v. Flowers — Opinion of the Court

It is also argued that to get rid of this alleged malapportionment the Court would have to declare unconstitutional not only the provisions of the charter but also § 150 and s 153 of the County Law. The complaint, however, challenges only the charter. It makes no challenge of any statewide law. And the three-judge court considered it as an attack only on the charter.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Moody v. Flowers — Opinion of the Court

In No. 624, the constitutional attack was directed to a state statute dealing with matters of local concern-the apportionment and districting for one county's governing board. The statute is not a statute of statewide application, but relates solely to the affairs of one county in the State. The fact that state officers were named as defendants cannot change the result.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Moody v. Flowers — Opinion of the Court

It is said that 29 counties having a city of consequence located within their borders have the same 'crazy quilt' of malapportionment to insure rural voters' control. It is said that 32 other counties provide for election of county board members at large but with a local residence requirement which insures rural control. It is said that six rural counties elect their governing bodies on an at-large basis with no local residence requirement. We indicate no views on the merits.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature