Which of the following best reflects the holding in the case Baker v. Carr (1962)?

The holding in Baker v. Carr (1962) primarily established the principle of "one person, one vote," which serves as a standard for reviewing the apportionment of congressional districts. This landmark case addressed issues of legislative redistricting and ensured that districts would be drawn so that population disparities would not disproportionately dilute the votes of citizens in underrepresented areas. The ruling emphasized that it is a justiciable issue, meaning that the courts have the authority to intervene in cases of redistricting where there are claims of unequal representation.

This decision had far-reaching implications for electoral equity, reinforcing the idea that individuals' voting power should be equal regardless of their geographic location. It marked a significant shift in how courts could handle cases involving legislative apportionment, moving away from the notion that such matters were purely political questions outside the jurisdiction of the judiciary.

Other options might discuss related aspects of constitutional law or districting but do not encapsulate the essence of the Baker v. Carr ruling as effectively as the concept of the one-person, one-vote standard.