"If he really believes that reapportionment is a questionable decision -- that is, the idea of Baker vs. Carr, one man, one vote -- then clearly, clearly, you'll find a lot of people, including me, willing to do whatever they can to keep him off the court.
Does Biden have even the most basic grasp of what he is bloviating about? Follow me on this:
a) Biden is Senator from Delaware
b) Delaware has two Senators out of 100, or two percent of the voting power in the Senate
c) The population of Delaware is roughly 830,000, while the population of the United States is roughly 294,000,000.
d)That means that the population of Delaware is roughly one-third of a percent of the population of the US, yet they control two percent of the Senate
e)So, clearly, tiny Delaware's representation on the Senate disproportionately gives a thinly-populated rural area such as Delaware more political heft than urban centers
If it's wrong for state legislators to have geographic representation, then surely it is wrong for US Senators to have geographic representation. I strongly urge Biden to resign immediately, and work to change the Constitution to ensure that Delaware's clout in the Senate is immediately reduced to reflect one man, one vote.
I like it!
Baker v. Carr didn't even deal with one-man-one-vote per se. It dealt with who gets to draw district lines. Historically, that was (and still is) done by state legislatures. Prior to the Warren Court, the Political Question Doctrine (that's a doctrine saying that the Supreme Court should stay out of stuff that the legislatures should be dealing with) kept the judiciary out of the issue.
Either side of this particular issue is actually tenable; someone has to draw those lines, and it might be a good idea to have the courts as a backup in the case of gerrymandering. But Biden mischaracterized the living breathing hell out of what Alito's position was. Alito said that the courts should simply stay out of it, because an abusive court can be just as dangerous, if not more so, than an abusive legislature.
Biden translates this to mean opposition to the principle of one man, one vote.
What you outline is proof that the founders did not intend that both houses of Congress operate under principles of proportional representation.
Why would the founders have required something of the states that they didn't require of the federal government, especially since the federal government is the creation of the states, not vice versa?
States should be allowed to have their Senates built along historical and geographical lines -- not along strictly population lines. It is a travesty that they were required to do something where the Constitution embodies precisely the opposite principle.
The Warren Court was flat-out wrong on this, and it is a decision that should have been overturned long ago.
One would like to think that Alito would have the balls to stand behind his earlier opinion, but he will doubtless be given the instructions to "dance", just as he has on abortion.
See #109. The same logic applies to electoral college.
What a bunch of dummy heads these DEMs are? The fact that they need to be constantly reminded of basic constitutional structure is proof that they dont' deserve to hold any power ever.
It's getting late so I'll just bookmark this thread and get back to you sometime soon with some more analogies and examples of the desperately destructive effect this has had on property rights of rural America in particular.
That, however, is not the only thing that has been terribly crippled and thrown out of balance in our exceptional World Super-Power Superior Republic with it's currently mangled democratic process!!!