1. Wesberry V. Sanders Argued on 1963 Ruled on 1964 By: Jerome Hester & Luis Perez

2. 14 th Amendment “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

3. Constitutional issue Did Georgia congressional districts violate the 14 th amendment. The Supreme Court noted that Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution declares that representatives shall be chosen "by the People of the several States" and shall be "apportioned among the several States...according to their respective Numbers...." These words, the Court held, mean that "as nearly as practicable one man's vote in a congressional election is to be worth as much as another's."

4. Litigant Wesberry claimed this system diluted his rights to vote compared to other Georgia residents. That the Georgia apportionment statute resulted in election districts that were unconstitutionally disproportionate to one another in population size.

5. Litigant 2 Sanders the governor of Georgia enforcing the law’s of the state’ which said that state rules regarding how vote are cast are unjust. Georgia was voting by districs rather than by person.

6. Background on case Wesberry complained that his district was not fairly represented in the U.S. Congress, and that their votes were not equalized with everyone else.

7. Majority opinion: key points Justice Black indicated that exact equality of population in each district was not entirely possible. Soon, however, computers made it possible to draw congressional districts with mathematical precision, And in Kirkpatrick v. Preisler the Court made that the standard for apportioning congressional election districts.

8. Significance The significance of this case was that it enforced the “One person one vote” system. Wesberry was the first real test of the "reapportionment revolution" set in motion by Baker v. Carr (1962), in which the Supreme Court held that federal courts could rule on reapportionment questions.

9. Your response to this case/reflection We believe that this case was a great case to undergo because, it showed how one person can make a difference. Also it helped enforce the 14 th amendment ruling on the “One person one vote process.”

10. Bibliography http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960- 1969/1963/1963_22http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960- 1969/1963/1963_22 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesberry_v_sa ndershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesberry_v_sa nders http://law.jrank.org/pages/13392/Wesberry -v-Sanders.htmlhttp://law.jrank.org/pages/13392/Wesberry -v-Sanders.html