What you outline is proof that the founders did not intend that both houses of Congress operate under principles of proportional representation.
Why would the founders have required something of the states that they didn't require of the federal government, especially since the federal government is the creation of the states, not vice versa?
States should be allowed to have their Senates built along historical and geographical lines -- not along strictly population lines. It is a travesty that they were required to do something where the Constitution embodies precisely the opposite principle.
The Warren Court was flat-out wrong on this, and it is a decision that should have been overturned long ago.
One would like to think that Alito would have the balls to stand behind his earlier opinion, but he will doubtless be given the instructions to "dance", just as he has on abortion.
Pure infringement on states rights. He should be lauded for calling it right. Not filibustered.
I hope he explains his position clearly and makes a strong case for why he is right.
Absolutely! I was thrilled today to hear Biden bichin about Alito's stand on the infamous "Cow don't vote" decision that over shifted both houses of each state legislature to overly represent metro-sexuals and under represent rural-sexuals!
This bad decision that has skewed the balance between people and places has been one of my most passionate causes. If it were to be revisited and overturned, Prop 77 in CA's special election would probably have not been needed at all!
But I fear you are right about the "dancing" orders. Maybe he could just nuance the whole thing like John Kerry... Oh no! Perish the thought!!!