The impact of Baker v. Carr included:

• A. Upholding the status quo in districting with no change.
• B. Opening the door to equal protection challenges to redistricting and the 'one person, one vote' doctrine.
• C. Banning federal involvement in redistricting.
• D. Eliminating the need for equal population in districts.

Answer: (B)

The main concept is that Baker v. Carr opened federal courts to review legislative redistricting and linked district population equality to the Equal Protection Clause. By ruling that apportionment issues were justiciable, the Court removed the idea that redistricting was purely a political question and could be challenged in court. This allowed challenges asserting that districts with unequal populations violate equal protection, and it laid down the “one person, one vote” principle that ensures votes carry roughly equal weight. That is why the impact is described as opening the door to equal protection challenges to redistricting and establishing the one person, one vote doctrine. It did not uphold the status quo, ban federal involvement, or eliminate the requirement for equal population in districts.