# Roudebush v. Hartke **Roudebush v. Hartke, 405 U.S. 15 (decided February 23, 1972)** — the Supreme Court decision that divides the labor between a state's recount machinery and a chamber of Congress judging its own members' elections under Art. I, § 5, cl. 1. Arising from Indiana's 1970 Senate race, the Court reversed a lower-court injunction against a state recount and held that the recount did not usurp the Senate's power: "A recount does not prevent the Senate from independently evaluating the election any more than the initial count does." The holding runs in both directions, which is why it is load-bearing for every congressional election contest. A state may count, recount and declare without trespassing on the chamber's prerogative — and the chamber's own final judgment on who is entitled to the seat is a **nonjusticiable political question**, beyond judicial review. A contestant who loses in the House or Senate has no appeal. *Stub — expand with the procedural history, the Burger Court lineup, and the relationship to [[Powell v. McCormack]]-line qualifications cases.* ## See also - [[How a Contested House Seat Is Decided]] — the FCEA machinery this case sits under - [[Federal Contested Elections Act]] — the statute the House built to exercise the Art. I, § 5 power - [[Refusal to Seat]] — the companion doctrine: exclusion at the oath rather than a statutory contest - [[Recount Trigger Crosswalk]] — the state recount machinery the Court declined to enjoin - [[United States House of Representatives]] · [[Congress Hub]]