Baker v. Carr, case decided in 1962 by the U.S. Supreme Court. Tennessee had failed to reapportion the state legislature for 60 years despite population growth and redistribution. Charles Baker, a voter, brought suit against the state (Joe Carr was a state official in charge of elections) in federal district court, claiming that the dilution of his vote as a result of the state's failure to reapportion violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The court dismissed the complaint on the grounds that it could not decide a political question. Baker appealed to the Supreme Court, which ruled that a case raising a political issue would be heard. This landmark decision opened the way for numerous suits on legislative apportionment legislative apportionment, subdivision of a political body (e.g., a state or province) for the purpose of electing legislative representatives. In the United States, the Constitution requires that Congressional representatives be elected on the basis of population.
..... Click the link for more information. .

Baker v. Carr

(1962) U.S. Supreme Court case that forced the Tennessee legislature to reapportion itself on the basis of population. The case ended the traditional overrepresentation of rural areas in the legislature and established that the court may intervene in apportionment cases. The court ruled that every citizen's vote should carry equal weight, regardless of the voter's place of residence. Its ruling in Reynolds v. Sims (1964) built on Baker by requiring virtually every state legislature to be reapportioned, ultimately causing political power in most states to shift from rural to urban areas.