In the 1963 case of Clinton v. Virginia, the U.S Supreme Court addressed a dispute over voting rights and redistricting in Virginia. The appellant, Clinton, argued that his constitutional right to equal protection under law was violated due to malapportionment in the state's electoral districts. He claimed that this resulted in unequal representation for voters across different regions of Virginia. The court ruled in favor of Clinton stating that apportionment schemes which give one vote more weight than another violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause - essentially asserting "one person, one vote". This decision led to significant changes not only within Virginia but also nationwide as it set a precedent for future cases related to voter equality and districting practices.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Clinton v. Virginia argued that the majority's decision to overturn a state law on constitutional grounds was an overreach of federal power. The justices contended that it is not within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to dictate how states should conduct their internal affairs, particularly when there are no clear violations of individual rights or liberties involved. They believed that such decisions should be left up to local governments and citizens who have a better understanding and stake in their community’s needs and values. Furthermore, they expressed concern about setting a precedent where federal courts could interfere with state laws based on subjective interpretations of constitutionality rather than concrete legal principles. This, they feared, would undermine states' sovereignty and disrupt the balance between federal and state powers established by the Constitution.