WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo

Media Items
WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo - Oral Argument, Part 1
Get Adobe Flash Player
WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo - Oral Argument, Part 2
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Archibald Cox (By special leave of Court, argued the cause for the United States, as amicus curiae, urging reversal)
Leonard B. Sand (Argued the cause for the appellants)
Irving Galt (Argued the cause for the appellees)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
20
Appellee: 
Lomenzo
Appellant: 
WMCA, Inc.
Decided By: 
Warren Court (1962-1965)
Opinion: 
377 U.S. 633 (1964)
Location No location information present.

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo , 377 U.S. 633 (1964)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_20)
Facts of the Case: 

The WMCA, acting on behalf of several New York City registered voters, challenged the constitutionality of Article III, Sections 2-5 of the New York State constitution alleging that its apportionment formula resulted in unfair weighting of both state legislature houses by favoring lesser populated rural areas over densely populated urban centers. On appeal from a dismissal of their complaint by a three-judge district court, the Supreme Court granted the WMCA certiorari.

Question: 

Did the apportionment formula contained in Article III, Sections 2-5, of the New York State constitution violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause?

Conclusion: 

Yes. In a 7-to-3 decision, the Court began by noting that this case was property before it since no other political relief was available to the WMCA. The Court then held that New York's apportionment formula violated the Equal Protection Clause since it did not apportion the state's senate and assembly substantially on a population basis. Consequently, New York's legislative apportionment scheme significantly undervalued the weight of urban area voters as compared with their rural and less densely populated counterparts. This practice constituted a form of geographical discrimination that violated notions of equal protection.

Decisions

Decision: 6 votes for WMCA, Inc., 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Equal Protection

Sort by Ideology

Wrote the majority opinion
Warren
Voted with the majority
Black
Voted with the majority
Douglas
Voted with the minority, joined Stewart's dissent
Clark
Wrote a dissent
Harlan
Voted with the majority
Brennan
Wrote a dissent
Stewart
Voted with the majority
White
Voted with the majority
Goldberg

Full Opinion by Justice Earl Warren

Sponsor