why did the us supreme court rule against the state of tennessee in baker v. carr?\ntennessee had…

why did the us supreme court rule against the state of tennessee in baker v. carr?\ntennessee had discriminated in favor of city voters over rural voters.\ntennessee had not redistricted since 1901, keeping rural districts in power.\ntennessee had refused to create districts that were the same shape.\ntennessee had refused to take part in the national census.

why did the us supreme court rule against the state of tennessee in baker v. carr?\ntennessee had discriminated in favor of city voters over rural voters.\ntennessee had not redistricted since 1901, keeping rural districts in power.\ntennessee had refused to create districts that were the same shape.\ntennessee had refused to take part in the national census.

Answer

Answer:

Tennessee had not redistricted since 1901, keeping rural districts in power.

Brief Explanations:

In Baker v. Carr, Tennessee's failure to redistrict since 1901 led to malapportionment, giving rural districts disproportionate power, which the Supreme - Court ruled against.