Why did the us supreme court rule against the state of tennessee in baker v. carr? tennessee had discriminated in favor of city voters over rural voters. tennessee had not redistricted since 1901

The us supreme court rule against the state of Tennessee in baker v. Carr because Tennessee had not redistricted since 1901.

Option B

Explanation:

The Supreme Court’s verdict in the case of Baker v. Carr is of great significance as it decided the question pertaining to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in the matter of legislative apportionment, therefore, enabling the courts to entertain the redistricting matters.

In this case, the suit was brought against Tennessee as it did not carry out redistricting since the year 1901. The suit was decreed against the State and the court has in length discussed as to what cases can be said to be political in nature.

1. should those convicted of violating laws be labeled?

-yes, because they are violating other people's human rights, so why should they get their's and other's don't?

2. do you feel that this labeling would be an infringement on a person's rights?

-yes it does technically but they lose the right to be human when they rap.e people of everything they have.

answer:

mclaren

explanation:

can i plz have brainlist