U.S. SUPREME COURT - "One Person, One Vote"

"Supreme Court mulls representation in ‘one person, one vote’ case" PBS NewsHour 12/8/2015

Let us not forget that this Supreme Court considers corporations as "one person."

Also, we know what Republican conservatives want and why they push voter suppression laws.

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Who should be counted when states divvy up their territory for representation: all residents or only those who can vote?  The Supreme Court heard arguments on Tuesday involving the very nuts and bolts of how American democracy works.  Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal joins Gwen Ifill to discuss the case.

GWEN IFILL (NewsHour):  .........the Supreme Court, where justices today heard one of the most important cases of this term involving the very nuts and bolts of how our democracy works, at issue, who gets counted when states have to divvy up their territory into state house and state senate districts, everyone who lives there, or just those who are eligible to vote?

Marcia Coyle of “The National Law Journal” was in the courtroom today, as always, and she’s here now to tell us more.

We’re talking about equal representation.  We always assume that somehow one man, one woman, one vote is the rule.  How did this get to the court?

MARCIA COYLE, The National Law Journal:  Well, as Justice Breyer I think pointed out in the arguments today, this case really raises the fundamental question of, what kind of democracy do we want?  Do we want a democracy in which everyone who is here is represented, or do we want a democracy in which only those who have the right to participate in the democratic process through the vote are represented?

The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, the court has held, includes the principle one person, one vote.  And that principle, the court has said, requires states to draw legislative districts of substantially equal population.  But the court has never said — and this principle goes back to the 1960s — the court has never said what population counts.

The case that the court heard today takes issue with what all 50 states have been doing for basically half-a-century, using total population.  The two Texas voters who brought the challenge to the Supreme Court claim that one person, one vote really requires states to draw districts on the basis of the eligibility of voters, of the voting population, eligible voting population.

GWEN IFILL:  So, if you’re — the way it works now, if you’re someone who just doesn’t like to vote or you’re a child under the age of 18, someone who is not qualified to vote, you’re counted as — for the representational purposes?

MARCIA COYLE:  That is correct.  Under total population, you are counted.

And, today, the justices examined both the theory, the meaning of one person, one vote, as well as the practical consequences of a shift from what the states have been doing for half-a-century to just using voter eligible population.