There was a landmark US Supreme Court case in 1964 called Reynolds vs. Sims. It states that voting districts for state legislative chambers must have equal population in every state.

This raises the question about the actual US Senate. I am wondering if the idea of making states with very different populations (California and Texas have a total of 70 million people, while Vermont and Wyoming have just around 1 million) have the same representations

I am not saying that the Senate benefits Republicans (it does, and that is not my opinion), I am saying that it seems at odds with Reynolds vs Sims, Wesberry vs Sanders, etc.

Changed status to publish