Reapportionment

Definition and stakes

Warren Burger,  Reynolds v. Sims — Opinion of the Court…

“ Limitations on the frequency of reapportionment are justified by the need for stability and continuity in the organization of the legislative system, although undoubtedly reapportioning no more frequently than every 10 years leads to some imbalance in the population of districts toward the end of the decennial period, and also to the development of resistance to change on the part of some incumbent legislators. ”
Source: Wikisource

Scott v. Germano — Opinion of the Court

“ The District Court shall retain jurisdiction of the case and in the event a valid reapportionment plan for the State Senate is not timely adopted it may enter such orders an it deems appropriate, including an order for a valid reapportionment plan for the State Senate or an order directing that its members be elected at large pending a valid reapportionment by the State itself. ”
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Felix Frankfurter Felix Frankfurter,  Baker v. Carr — Dissenting Opinion

“ The Arizona Constitution assigned representation to each county in each house, giving one or two senators and from one to seven representatives to each, and making no provision for reapportionment. [127] [p319]
4. Contemporary apportionment. Detailed recent studies are available to describe the present-day constitutional and statutory status of apportionment in the fifty States. [128] They demonstrate a decided twentieth-century trend away from population as the exclusive base of representation.
”
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature