Statements (69)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
| gptkbp:argued_on |
November 6, 1978
Attorneys for the appellants. Attorneys for the appellees. |
| gptkbp:case_analysis |
Analyzed for its constitutional implications.
Discussed in legal forums. Analyzed the implications of apportionment. Critiqued for its judicial activism. Discussed in law schools. Evaluated for its historical significance. Evaluated for its impact on democracy. Implications for state legislative districts. Still relevant in contemporary electoral law. Studied in political science courses. Critiqued for its implications on state sovereignty. |
| gptkbp:case_number |
gptkb:Baker_v._Carr
Documented in legal textbooks. Summary available in legal databases. Documented in Supreme Court archives. Originated from a Tennessee redistricting dispute. Summary published in legal journals. |
| gptkbp:case_outcome |
Affirmed the lower court's ruling.
Set a precedent for future redistricting cases. Reviewed by legal scholars. Impacts on future electoral reforms. Impacts on state legislative processes. Influenced public policy on voting. Influenced state legislative practices. Major victory for voters. Majority opinion emphasized equal representation. Reinforced the importance of fair representation. Reinforced the principle of equal representation. Reviewed in constitutional law literature. |
| gptkbp:case_significance |
Critical in shaping electoral districting.
|
| gptkbp:case_types |
Constitutional law case
|
| gptkbp:court |
Nine justices.
|
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
March 26, 1979 |
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Potter_Stewart
Dissent argued against federal intervention. |
| gptkbp:docket_number |
No. 1, 1970.
|
| gptkbp:historical_context |
Civil Rights Movement.
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
442 U. S. 735
|
| gptkbp:impact |
Influenced the Voting Rights Act.
Significant influence on voting rights and redistricting. |
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
gptkb:442_U._S._735
Frequently cited in legal arguments. Referenced in Supreme Court opinions. |
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
Judicial review of state legislative apportionment.
|
| gptkbp:jurisdiction |
United States federal jurisdiction.
|
| gptkbp:legacy |
Legacy of promoting electoral fairness.
|
| gptkbp:legal_context |
Context of the 1970s political climate.
Voting rights movement. |
| gptkbp:legal_framework |
Strengthened federal role in state elections.
|
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
Redistricting and representation
Claims of unequal representation. |
| gptkbp:legal_outcome |
Expanded the scope of federal judicial power.
|
| gptkbp:legislation |
Equal protection clause.
|
| gptkbp:outcome |
Court ruled that federal courts can intervene in state redistricting cases.
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
Baker v. Carr established judicial oversight.
One person, one vote principle. Subsequent redistricting cases. |
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Justice_William_J._Brennan_Jr.
|
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:Reynolds_v._Sims
|
| gptkbp:significance |
Established the principle of equal representation.
Landmark decision in electoral law. |
| gptkbp:year |
gptkb:1979
|
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:Smith_v._Maryland
|
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
6
|