Menu
Comparing the “originalist” methodology of Wesberry v. Sanders to the non-originalist methodology of Reynolds v. Sims.
Rejecting Wesberry v. Sanders’ claim that the original meaning of the House of Representatives Clause requires an effort at equally populous congressional districts.
Michael W. McConnell, The Redistricting Cases: Original Mistakes and Current Consequences, 24 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 103 (2000).
Arguing that even the House of Representatives, which is supposed to represent the people directly, cannot possibly be allocated based on equal apportionment.
Arguing that this Clause confers on House Members an exclusive right to vote on bills.
Alfred H. Kelly, Clio and the Court: An Illicit Love Affair, 1965 S. Ct. Rev. 119 (1965).
Arguing that Wesberry v. Sanders “mangled constitutional history” in reaching the conclusion that the House of Representatives Clause calls for equal apportionment.
Have we missed an article? Please let us know of any additional scholarship that should be included in the Interactive Constitution.