Colegrove v. Green - Significance, Court Declares Apportionment A "political Question", Further Readings

appellant appellee decision justices

Appellant

Kenneth W. Colegrove

Appellee

Dwight H. Green, as a member ex-officio of the Primary Certifying Board of the State of Illinois

Appellant's Claim

That congressional districts in Illinois were disparate in population size, and therefore not truly representative.

Chief Lawyer for Appellant

Urban A. Lavery

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

William C. Wines

Justices for the Court

Harold Burton, Felix Frankfurter (writing for the Court), Stanley Forman Reed, Wiley Blount Rutledge

Justices Dissenting

Hugo Lafayette Black, William O. Douglas, Frank Murphy (Harlan Fiske Stone and Robert H. Jackson did not participate)

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

10 June 1946

Decision

Apportionment issues are political questions which must be decided by state legislatures with congressional oversight.

Related Cases

Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962).
Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 (1964).

Additional Topics

Colegrove v. Green - Significance

More than a decade of state legislative inaction following Colegrove finally resulted, in 1962, in the landmark Baker v. Carr decision. In Baker v. Carr the Supreme Court held that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment renders apportionment subject to federal control, thus overruling Colegrove. The appellants in Colegrove v. Green were three qualified Illinois voters--including K…

Colegrove v. Green - Court Declares Apportionment A "political Question"

Writing for a divided and diminished Court (Chief Justice Stone had recently died, and Justice Jackson was on leave), Justice Frankfurter upheld the decision of the district court. The question of how election boundaries within a state are drawn is not, he declared, one for the courts to decide.We are of the opinion that the petitioners ask of this Court what is beyond its competence to grant. Thi…

Citing this material

Please include a link to this page if you have found this material useful for research or writing a related article. Content on this website is from high-quality, licensed material originally published in print form. You can always be sure you're reading unbiased, factual, and accurate information.

Highlight the text below, right-click, and select “copy”. Paste the link into your website, email, or any other HTML document.

User Comments

6 months ago

Re: Colegrove v Green

The decision found "REDISTRICTING" to be a political question and denied standing. REAPPORTIONMENT was not at issue as I recall.

almost 4 years ago

Does Baker v. Carr truly overrule the Colegrove opinion or does it simply distinguish it as not controlling regarding determination of non-justiciability? It seems as though the enitire Baker line of cases (Gray, Reynolds, Wesbury, etc.) just limit Colegrove and do not actually overturn it. Not trying to be a critic of your writing. I am actually doing some legal writing myself and ran across your page that said Baker overruled Colegrove and I just wanted to be as accurate as possible in my writing because my professor will enjoy taking off points, no matter the answer. Thanks.