Document: 377 U.S. 695 84 S.Ct. 1449 12 L.Ed.2d 620 Mabel V. ROMAN, Clerk, etc., et al., Appellants,v.Richard SINCOCK al. No. 307. Argued Dec. 9, 1963. Decided June 15, 1964. [Syllabus from pages 695-696 intentionally omitted] Frederick Bernays Wiener, Washington, D.C., for appellants. Vincent A. Theisen, Wilmington, Del., appellees. Sol. Gen. Archibald Cox, the United States, as amicus curiae, by special leave of Court. Mr. Chief Justice WARREN delivered opinion 1 Presented decision in this case is constitutional validity, under Equal Protection Clause Fourteenth Amendment to Federal Constitution, apportionment seats Delaware General Assembly. I. 2 Shortly after Courts' Baker v. Carr, 369 186, 82 691, 7 663, plaintiffs below, residents, taxpayers and qualified voters New Castle County, Delaware, filed a complaint States District Court their own behalf on all persons similarly situated, challenging Legislature. Defendants, sued representative capacities, were various officials charged with performance certain duties connection state elections. The alleged deprivation rights Amendment, asserted that had jurisdiction 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 1988, 28 1343 2201. 3 Plaintiffs below Legislature resulted an 'invidious discrimination inhabitants County City Wilmington,' operated deny them right cast votes legislators 'that are equal effect every other citizen State Delaware,' was arbitrary capricious failing provide reasonable classification those voting members Assembly.1 also they without any adequate remedy since existing legislative frozen into 1897 Constitution; present legislature dominated representing two less populous counties; it was, practical matter, impossible amend Constitution or convene convention purpose reapportioning Assembly; consistently failed take appropriate action respect reapportionment. 4 sought declaration Art. II, § 2, which established both houses Legislature, unconstitutional, injunction against defendants prevent holding further elections scheme. requested either reapportion population basis or, alternatively, direct November 1962 general election be conducted at-large basis. A three-judge asked plaintiffs, promptly convened. 5 On July 25, 1962, entered order staying proceedings until August 7, permit 'some action.' 207 F.Supp. 205. court noted that, publication proposed amendment at least three months prior next required law,2 would serve no useful grant stay beyond 1962. 6 30, Gener l Assembly approved provisions Constitution,3 based upon recommendations bipartisan reapportionment committee appointed Governor. Under law could not, however, become effective unless again during succeeding session Assembly.4 refusing dismiss suit, stated while desire substitute its judgment collective wisdom matters apportionment, alternative but proceed deciding case. 210 395. Some applied so coming office January 1963 have opportunity approve amendment. 8, preliminary conducting provisions. thereafter permitted request declared unconstitutional provisional 8 October 16, denied applications stay. 396. Denial effectively pursuant Constitution. After extended pretrial proceedings, court, 27, parties agreed accuracy series exhibits, statistics statistical computations. In early 1963, Assembly, elected requisite two-thirds vote. As result, became 17, having been passed successive Assemblies.5 Trial before ensued, expert testimony political scientists being presented. 9 April Court, Circuit Judge Biggs, held amendment, gross invidious others violation Amendment. 215 169. Stating 'the fundamental issue presented * adjudication whether not apportioning offends electors because debasement rights,' indicated pass validity considering detail concluded '(t)he uneven growth different areas created condition numbers senatorial districts differed only intercounty intracounty basis.' discussing turned consideration plaintiffs' claim 'personal civil rights' great importance, continued: 10 '* Section Article II existed exists today creates such inequality power, resulting discrimination, bring within proscription States. This true Senate well House Representatives Delaware. While mathematical exactitude cannot expected, indeed possible absolute sense, disparities now, startling nature demonstrate franchise individual tolerate.'6 11 one house bicameral must substantially population, rejected relevancy so-called federal analogy justification departures population-based scheme legislature. Although finding rational previously amended, neverertheless basically function, should given itself properly accordance requirements attempting delineate some guidelines follow reapportioning, eye toward impending 1964 elections, gave 1, adopt constitutionally valid plan.7 decree declaring retained injunctive relief if necessary do so. May 6, Supreme advised Governor notwithstanding he according invalidated proclaim redistricting plan seats. Court's predicated view final one, appe lable granted. Acting advice, making reference decision, Governor, proclaimed providing these circumstances, 20, reserved make orders might deem necessary. motion pending appeal, application MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, stayed operation disposition Notices appeal decree, denial stay, timely defendants. Pursuant Rule 15(3), appeals treated single When appellees affirm, appellants countered advance. 21, we probable granted appellants' 375 877, 148, 109. II. 13 relating force when litigation commenced, geographically divided 17 35 electing senators four-year terms, approximately half years, representatives two-year terms. Qualified each district elect senator representative, Constitution's plan. comprised counties, sizeable metropolitan area—Wilmington. five allocated Kent Sussex 'rural' (that part county outside Wilmington), Wilmington districts. number boundaries specifically fixed described provisions, provision made alteration. adopted, 180,000, about 32,000 living 38,000 residing 105,000 (of whom 70,000 lived Wilmington). By 1960, total increased 446,292, 307,446 resided 95,827 211,619 County. And, 1960 census figures, 65,651 73,195 14 scheme, perpetuated over 65 years later, ranged 4,177 64,820, maximum population-variance ratio, between most districts, 15-to-1. Senatorial Counties much smaller than exception which, 4,177, smallest State.8 Only 22% State's majority 17-member Senate, applying figures commenced. 15 Representative 1,643 58,228, House, 35-to-1. Again, average significantly although several among State. Applying 18 sparsely populated containing 18.5% Representatives.9 Persons six 233,718, more one-half same 16,552 House.10 Serious considered Court.11 16 Evidence showed despite repeated attempts call purpose, change No initiative referendum procedure Delaware12 Legislative has traditionally provided wholly concurrence consecutive legislatures Constitution.13 may also, vote, submit question hold convention.14 size 21 members, four added allotted equally Counties, giving counties seven senators.15 large comprising counties. result change, voter entitled vote representative. With Representatives, provides excess 15,000 additional major fraction thereof. original affected, receiving divided, commission headed new elects representative.16 net regards immediate changes representation allot increasing 45 members. Representation unaffected. revised ratio reduced 12-to-1 remains 15-to-1 Senate. elected, 28% population. where 31% reside. About 21% represented called, delegates method affected amended and, future convention, Thus, continue 41, counties.17 III. 19 Reynolds Sims, 533, 1362, requires apportioned Neither apportioned. correctly found invalid, affirm decisions below. 20 For reasons our Reynolds,18 reliance justify deviations misplaced.19 And argument upheld Congress admitted Union heir factors unconvincing.20 deferring election, imminence disruptive had, acted wise temperate manner. did err granting apparent comply requirements, probable. Our affirmance meant indicate approval attempt language permissible bounds discretion deviating population.21 problem does lend uniform formula, neither practicable nor desirable establish rigid standards evaluating Clause. Rather, proper judicial approach ascertain whether, particular circumstances whose issue, there faithful adherence representation, minor occur recognizing free taint arbitrariness discrimination. 22 Apart what said Reynolds, express questions remedies prese t time.22 Regardless Constitution23 fact matter delay inherent following prescription amendments Assemblies allowed impermissible appellees' voice represent them. equitable principles, now determine advisable, avoid disruption processes time allow insufficient effectuation rights. We therefore here appealed from, remand consistent views Sims. 23 It ordered. 24 Affirmed remanded. 25 CLARK concurs his concurring 587, 1395. 26 Dissenting HARLAN printed Nos. 23, 27 589, STEWART. apparently reflects 'no policy, simply dispel showing suggesting explanation aspects Delaware's system apportionment. Accordingly, my dissenting Lucas Forty-Fourth Colorado, 744, 1477, I insofar holds violates Interestingly, I, 3, Del.C.Ann. provides: 'All shall equal.' See F.Supp., 207. reported sub nom. Sincock Terry Duffy. XVI, becoming 53 Del.Laws, c. 425 (1962); 54 (1963). 184. judges wrote short opinions. Wright concurred strictly He 'precatory observation' Biggs Layton reached, Representatives. contained severability clause, whole need consider valid. indicated, thought apportion nonpopulation, area patterned Congress. Included chart establ shed tracing period 1930—1960. 176. 1890—1960, included opinion. 174—175. pointed out 'The heaviest concentration population; nonetheless, former latter Assembly.' tended generally 'hundred,' geographical subdivision founding, detailed fashion composed hundreds portions hundreds. discussion lack significance presence absence available remedy, see U.S., pp. 736—737, S.Ct., 1473—1474. composition 181. charts indicating reapportioned, including figures. 179—180. 571—576, 1386—1389. That possessed attributes limited sovereignty inception inapplicable Whatever role colonial period, never government adopted. hardly contended elements sovereign formed, compare 'there *.' Additionally, challenged, even fails resemble significant respects: plainly chosen Although, senators, per county, solely election. Each represents located. Members course large, entire rejecting p. 582, 1392. suggested ratios 1/2-to-1 presumably comport minimal requisites, thereof necessarily involve too extreme sustainable. 190. 585, 1393. Particularly can initial opinion, incident statutory instead obviate inherently involved complying requirement effective. 206—207. manner, suggested, Legislature's deficient free, law, expeditiously enactment consonant Unfortunately, act suggestion, hereinbefore discussed, late However, merits, intimated 'then statute meeting 191.

Category: 1