One Citizen, One Vote

United States Supreme Court

Two cases have come before the Supreme Court discussing congressional delegations and redistricting.

This is a political process fraught with backroom deals and scheming.

Different interests in the state of California especially hope for certain outcomes on the issue.

When the Framers of the Constitution established the House as a popular branch, the matter of representation troubled the Southern States. They wanted their slaves to count, and this give them more representation. Northern states, free states, objects to counting the slaves because they did not vote.

The convention then settled for every slave counting for 3/5 of a person.

The final agreement had given the Southern states and unfair advantage, since slave states would boast of more representatives, and those reps were not accountable to their constituents, since 3/5 of them were slaves, with no rights which a white man was "bound to respect", as stated by slave-owning Chief Justice Roger Taney.

Since then, slaves received recognition as citizens, and can vote.

One hundred fifty years later, another group of non-voting residents has emerged and expanded: illegal aliens.

The Supremes will have to decide whether "one person, one vote" must include non-citizens.

The answer should be simple: No!

"We the People" in the preamble of the Constitution has a clear and convincing qualifier: "Of the United States".

The document applies to citizens, the rights enumerated and enforced also belong to citizens.

The Supreme Court should return the power of the states, and the right of citizenship, back to who live in this country legally.

Apportionment should not recognize individuals not living in the country legally.

This potential ruling will have significant outcomes, no question about it.

Yet to ensure the rule of law, and the blessings of liberty enshrined in the Constitution, the Supreme Court must rule and recognize "One Citizen, One Vote".