Misplaced Pages

#201798

39-597: Article IV, Section 4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence . The original substance of the clause was first proposed at the Constitutional Convention as part of

78-748: A challenge of state legislative apportionments, the Supreme Court declared that the Republican Form of Government Clause cannot be used as a basis to challenge state electoral malapportionment in court. However, the court clarified in Baker v. Carr (1962) that legislature malapportionment claims can be decided in court under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment , as the equal protection issue

117-638: A change in how states were represented in Congress; under the Articles each state received one vote. Madison believed representation ought to be apportioned by population, with more populous states having more votes than less populous states. Madison was also concerned with preventing a tyranny of the majority . The government needed to be neutral between the various factions or interest groups that divided society—creditors and debtors, rich and poor, or farmers, merchants and manufacturers. Madison believed that

156-456: A compromise. Frankfurter, joined by Justice John Marshall Harlan II , dissented vigorously and at length, arguing that the Court had cast aside history and judicial restraint, and violated the separation of powers between legislatures and Courts. He wrote: Appellants invoke the right to vote and to have their votes counted. But they are permitted to vote and their votes are counted. They go to

195-584: A concurrence on the substance of Baker's claims, which would have enabled a majority that could have granted relief for Baker. Instead, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the District Court. The large majority in this case can in many ways be attributed to Brennan, who convinced Justice Potter Stewart that the case was a narrow ruling dealing only with the right to challenge the statute. Brennan also talked down Justices Hugo Black and William O. Douglas from their usual absolutist positions to achieve

234-451: A constitution by convention but was quashed by the existing charter government. In Luther , the Supreme Court refused to decide whether Rhode Island's charter government was illegitimate because of its limitations on voting rights. In Pacific States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Oregon , the Supreme Court was asked to invalidate referendums (a form of direct democracy rather than representative democracy ) permitted by state law, on

273-563: A single faction could more easily control the government within a state but would have a more difficult time dominating a national government comprising many different interest groups. To protect both national authority and minority rights, Madison believed Congress should be granted veto power over state laws. While waiting for the Convention to formally begin, Madison sketched out the Virginia Plan in consultation with members of

312-710: Is an accepted version of this page The Virginia Plan (also known as the Randolph Plan or the Large-State Plan ) was a proposed plan of government for the United States presented at the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The plan called for the creation of a supreme national government with three branches and a bicameral legislature . The plan was drafted by James Madison and Edmund Randolph . The Virginia Plan

351-520: Is equally represented. The Virginia Plan and the debate surrounding it are prominently featured in the 1989 film A More Perfect Union , which depicts the events of the 1787 Constitutional Convention. Presented largely from the viewpoint and words of James Madison, the movie was mainly filmed in Independence Hall . Baker v. Carr Baker v. Carr , 369 U.S. 186 (1962), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which

390-646: The Alabama Constitution 's provision for two state senators from each county and similar provisions elsewhere. Similarly, the Tennessee Constitution prevented counties from being split and portions of a county from being attached to other counties or parts of counties in creating a legislative district. This was overridden on the principle of basing districts on population. Today counties are frequently split among districts in forming Tennessee State Senate districts. "One person, one vote"

429-677: The Constitutional Convention gathered in Philadelphia to revise the Articles of Confederation , the first plan of government of the United States. The Articles were widely criticized for creating a weak central government—the Confederation Congress —that was powerless to solve the nation's problems. Under the Articles, Congress was unable to raise taxes to pay for a military or pay off foreign debts. It also lacked

SECTION 10

#1732773372202

468-848: The Reconstruction era Congress disestablished ten state governments during peacetime and placed them under military rule. The law, known as the First Reconstruction Act , found those states to be unrepublican under the Guarantee Clause. The Supreme Court acquiesced to the disestablishment in Georgia v. Stanton (1868). Later, Congress also excluded elected legislators (a power recognized in Luther ) when it faced "an election dispute created by state measures to suppress black voter turnout." Virginia Plan This

507-587: The Tennessee General Assembly 's legislative districts be redrawn every ten years to provide for districts of substantially equal population (as was to be done for congressional districts). Baker's complaint was that Tennessee had not redistricted since 1901, in response to the 1900 census . By the time of Baker's lawsuit, the population had shifted such that his district in Shelby County had about ten times as many residents as some of

546-481: The Twenty-Sixth Amendment (reducing the voting age to eighteen). It is understood that the Guarantee Clause requires states to produce governments by electoral processes, as opposed to inherited monarchies, dictatorships, or military rule. In cases such as Luther v. Borden (1849) and Pacific States Telephone and Telegraph Co. v. Oregon (1912), the Supreme Court held that the enforcement of

585-620: The Virginia Plan , presented by Edmund Randolph . The Guarantee Clause reflects a founding understanding of republicanism, which entails governing through electoral processes. As written in the Federalist No. 57 : "The elective mode of obtaining rulers is the characteristic policy of republican government." Quoting Montesquieu , James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 43 that "should a popular insurrection happen in one of

624-515: The rural districts. Rural citizens' votes were thus overrepresented compared to those of urban citizens. Baker's argument was that this discrepancy was causing him to fail to receive the "equal protection of the laws" the Fourteenth Amendment requires. Defendant Joe Carr was sued in his position as Tennessee Secretary of State . Carr was not the person who set the district lines – the state legislature had done that – but

663-526: The Confederation. Referring to Shays' Rebellion in Massachusetts, he warned of "anarchy from the laxity of government". The solution to these problems, he asserted, must be based on "the republican principle". Calling for the creation of a supreme national government, the Virginia Plan was a radical departure from the Articles of Confederation. Modeled on the existing state governments,

702-482: The Court held that redistricting qualifies as a justiciable question under the Fourteenth Amendment 's equal protection clause, thus enabling federal courts to hear Fourteenth Amendment-based redistricting cases. The court summarized its Baker holding in a later decision as follows: "the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment limits the authority of a State Legislature in designing

741-482: The Guarantee Clause is a nonjusticiable political question , to be decided by Congress or the President instead of the courts. At the time of Luther , Rhode Island was the last state that did not adopt a constitution . Instead, it continued to rely on the 1663 royal charter issued by King Charles II , and restricted the franchise to men who owned more than $ 134 in land. A rival government attempted to adopt

780-545: The States, the others are able to quell it. Should abuses creep into one part, they are reformed by those that remain sound." At the time of the founding, however, states restricted the right to vote based on race, sex, and property ownership. Madison suggested that these existing practices in the states, which he called "existing republican forms", may be continued. Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution explicitly gave

819-598: The Supreme Court handed down two cases, Wesberry v. Sanders and Reynolds v. Sims , that required the United States House of Representatives and state legislatures to establish electoral districts of equal population on the principle of one person, one vote . Plaintiff Charles Baker was a Republican who lived in Shelby County, Tennessee , and had served as the mayor of Millington , near Memphis . The Tennessee State Constitution required that

SECTION 20

#1732773372202

858-471: The Virginia and Pennsylvania delegations, particularly Virginia's governor, Edmund Randolph, who largely shared his vision of a strong national government. While Madison is often given chief credit for producing the plan, it was Randolph who contributed substantial elements of it and then officially put it before the Convention on May 29, 1787. In his introduction, Randolph highlighted the problems facing

897-544: The authority to control foreign and interstate commerce. The Articles had no provision for executive and judicial branches, which meant the Confederation government lacked effective means to enforce its own laws and treaties against non-compliant states. James Madison , a delegate from Virginia, believed that the solution to America's problems was to be found in a strong central government. Congress needed compulsory taxation authority as well as power to regulate foreign and interstate commerce. To prevent state interference with

936-434: The case to the federal district court for further proceedings. Justice Felix Frankfurter strongly dissented, arguing that the Court's decision cast aside history and judicial restraint and violated the separation of powers between legislatures and courts. The case did not have any immediate effect on electoral districts, but it set an important precedent regarding the power of federal courts to address redistricting. In 1964,

975-538: The composition of state legislative districts, which in Alabama and many other states had overrepresented rural districts and underrepresented urban districts with much greater populations. This principle was formally enunciated in Reynolds v. Sims (1964). The Court decided that in states with bicameral legislatures , like Alabama, the state in this case, both houses had to be apportioned on this standard. This voided

1014-657: The geographical districts from which representatives are chosen either for the State Legislature or for the Federal House of Representatives." ( Gray v. Sanders , 372 U.S. 368 (1963)). The court had previously held in Gomillion v. Lightfoot that districting claims over racial discrimination could be brought under the Fifteenth Amendment. The case arose from a lawsuit against

1053-420: The ground that they violate the Guarantee Clause's republican form of government requirement. The court refused to invalidate referendums. Scholars have commented that these decisions are consistent with the statement in Federalist No. 43 that "States may choose to substitute other republican forms, they have a right to do so, and to claim the federal guaranty for the latter." In Colegrove v. Green (1946),

1092-415: The national government's authority, Madison believed there needed to be a way to enforce the national supremacy, such as an explicit right of Congress to use force against non-compliant states and the creation of a national court system. Madison also believed that to be a truly national government, Congress would need to exercise authority over citizens directly—not simply through the states. This would require

1131-640: The plan called for three branches of government (executive, legislative and judicial). Since the legislature appointed both the executive and judicial branches, however, the plan lacked the system of checks and balances that became central to the US Constitution. It was presented to the Convention as fifteen draft resolutions that outlined basic principles of government. Large states supported this plan, and smaller states generally opposed it, preferring alternatives that guaranteed each state equal representation regardless of population. On June 15, 1787,

1170-480: The political process. The case had to be put over for reargument because in conference no clear majority emerged for either side of the case. During the case, Justice Charles Evans Whittaker recused himself for health reasons, ultimately retiring from the Court in 1962. The opinion was finally handed down in March 1962, nearly a year after it was initially argued. The Court split 6 to 2 in ruling that Baker's case

1209-732: The polls, they cast their ballots, they send their representatives to the state councils. Their complaint is simply that the representatives are not sufficiently numerous or powerful. Having declared redistricting issues justiciable in Baker , the court laid out a new test for evaluating such claims. The Court formulated the famous " one person, one vote " standard under American jurisprudence for legislative redistricting, holding that every person had to be weighted equally in legislative apportionment. This affected numerous state legislatures that had not redistricted congressional districts for decades, despite major population shifts. It also ultimately affected

Guarantee Clause - Misplaced Pages Continue

1248-615: The smaller states presented the New Jersey Plan , which proposed a single-chamber legislature where each state, regardless of population, would have one vote, as under the Articles of Confederation. In July, after the meeting of the First Committee of Eleven, the Convention settled on the Connecticut Compromise , creating a House of Representatives apportioned by population and a Senate in which each state

1287-481: The state of Tennessee, which had not conducted redistricting since 1901. Tennessee argued that the composition of legislative districts constituted a nonjusticiable political question , as the U.S. Supreme Court had held in Colegrove v. Green (1946). In a majority opinion joined by five other justices, Justice William J. Brennan Jr. held that redistricting did not qualify as a political question, though he remanded

1326-585: The states power to decide voting qualifications, although Article I, Section 4 gives Congress authority to regulate the time, place, and manner of federal elections. Beginning in the aftermath of the Civil War, subsequent amendments broadened the right to vote and restricted discriminatory state laws. These include the Fifteenth (no denial of right to vote based on race), Nineteenth (no denial of right to vote based on sex), Twenty-Fourth (no poll tax), and

1365-593: Was first applied as a standard for Congressional districts in Wesberry v. Sanders . State legislatures were supposed to redistrict according to population changes, but many had not for decades. Baker v. Carr and subsequent cases fundamentally changed the nature of political representation in the United States, requiring not just Tennessee but nearly every state to redistrict during the 1960s, often several times. This reapportionment increased urban areas' political power and reduced that of more rural areas. After he left

1404-414: Was justiciable, producing, in addition to the opinion of the Court by Justice William J. Brennan , three concurring opinions and two dissenting opinions. Brennan reformulated the political question doctrine, identifying six factors to help in determining which questions are "political" in nature. Cases that are political in nature are marked by: Justice Tom C. Clark switched his vote at the last minute to

1443-410: Was notable for its role in setting the overall agenda for debate in the Convention and, in particular, for setting forth the idea of population-weighted representation in the proposed national legislature. The Virginia Plan favored the interests of states with large populations, and the New Jersey Plan was proposed in response to protect small state interests. From May 25 to September 17, 1787,

1482-449: Was separate from the Guarantee Clause challenge. In 2019, the Supreme Court reiterated in Rucho v. Common Cause (a case about political gerrymandering ) that the Guarantee Clause is not a justiciable issue capable of being litigated in court. Cases such as Luther v. Borden held the Guarantee Clause to be a political question to be resolved by Congress. Relying on that understanding,

1521-534: Was sued ex officio as the person ultimately responsible for the conduct of elections in the state and the publication of district maps. Tennessee argued that the composition of legislative districts was essentially a political question, not a judicial one, as had been held by Colegrove v. Green , a plurality opinion of the Court in which Justice Felix Frankfurter declared that "Courts ought not to enter this political thicket." Frankfurter believed that relief for legislative malapportionment had to be won through

#201798