Wesberry v. Sanders
E478057
Wesberry v. Sanders is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle that congressional districts must be drawn so that each person's vote is as equal in weight as practicable, laying groundwork for the "one person, one vote" standard.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Wesberry v. Sanders canonical | 3 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T4864809 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Wesberry v. Sanders Context triple: [Reynolds v. Sims decision, relatedCase, Wesberry v. Sanders]
-
A.
Baker v. Carr
Baker v. Carr is a landmark 1962 U.S. Supreme Court case that established federal courts’ authority to hear legislative redistricting disputes under the Equal Protection Clause, paving the way for the “one person, one vote” principle.
-
B.
Reynolds v. Sims decision
The Reynolds v. Sims decision is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that established the “one person, one vote” principle by requiring state legislative districts to be roughly equal in population under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
C.
South Carolina v. Katzenbach
South Carolina v. Katzenbach is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, affirming broad federal power to combat racial discrimination in voting.
-
D.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
E.
Katzenbach v. Morgan
Katzenbach v. Morgan is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power under the Fourteenth Amendment to prohibit certain state voting restrictions, reinforcing federal authority to protect voting rights.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Wesberry v. Sanders Target entity description: Wesberry v. Sanders is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle that congressional districts must be drawn so that each person's vote is as equal in weight as practicable, laying groundwork for the "one person, one vote" standard.
-
A.
Baker v. Carr
Baker v. Carr is a landmark 1962 U.S. Supreme Court case that established federal courts’ authority to hear legislative redistricting disputes under the Equal Protection Clause, paving the way for the “one person, one vote” principle.
-
B.
Reynolds v. Sims decision
The Reynolds v. Sims decision is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that established the “one person, one vote” principle by requiring state legislative districts to be roughly equal in population under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
C.
South Carolina v. Katzenbach
South Carolina v. Katzenbach is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, affirming broad federal power to combat racial discrimination in voting.
-
D.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
E.
Katzenbach v. Morgan
Katzenbach v. Morgan is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power under the Fourteenth Amendment to prohibit certain state voting restrictions, reinforcing federal authority to protect voting rights.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
landmark voting rights case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
election law ⓘ |
| category |
United States Supreme Court cases of the Warren Court
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court cases on legislative apportionment ⓘ United States electoral redistricting case ⓘ |
| citation | 376 U.S. 1 ⓘ |
| constitutionalClause | Elections Clause NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted | Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1964-02-17 ⓘ |
| defendant | Herman E. Talmadge Sanders NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| dissentingJustices |
Arthur J. Goldberg
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Byron R. White NERFINISHED ⓘ John M. Harlan II NERFINISHED ⓘ Potter Stewart NERFINISHED ⓘ Tom C. Clark NERFINISHED ⓘ William J. Brennan Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| effectOnStates | forced redrawing of many states’ congressional district maps ⓘ |
| fullName | Wesberry v. Sanders NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| holding | U.S. House of Representatives districts must be drawn so that one person’s vote in a congressional election is as nearly as practicable equal in weight to that of any other person in the state ⓘ |
| impact |
required states to make congressional districts substantially equal in population
ⓘ
strengthened judicial oversight of malapportioned congressional districts ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
congressional district apportionment
ⓘ
weight of individual votes ⓘ |
| legalPrinciple | one person, one vote ⓘ |
| majorityJustices |
Arthur J. Goldberg
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Byron R. White NERFINISHED ⓘ Earl Warren NERFINISHED ⓘ Hugo L. Black NERFINISHED ⓘ Tom C. Clark NERFINISHED ⓘ William O. Douglas NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Hugo L. Black NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| originatingState | Georgia NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| overruled | prior practices allowing large population disparities among congressional districts within a state ⓘ |
| plaintiff | James P. Wesberry Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| precedentFor | subsequent one person, one vote decisions involving congressional districts ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Baker v. Carr
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Reynolds v. Sims NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine | justiciability of apportionment claims ⓘ |
| standardAnnounced | as nearly as practicable equal population among congressional districts within a state ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | federal congressional redistricting ⓘ |
| term | 1963 Term ⓘ |
| timePeriod | Warren Court era ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1964 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Wesberry v. Sanders Description of subject: Wesberry v. Sanders is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle that congressional districts must be drawn so that each person's vote is as equal in weight as practicable, laying groundwork for the "one person, one vote" standard.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.