Q: How to challenge House seat cap for proportional representation?

A: Filing a constitutional challenge to the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 requires establishing standing, which means showing you've suffered a concrete, particularized injury from the current apportionment system. You might argue your vote is diluted compared to voters in less populous districts, similar to the arguments in Wesberry v. Sanders. Federal courts have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 for constitutional questions, and you should file in the U.S. District Court where you reside.

The complaint needs to clearly articulate how the 435-seat cap violates the proportional representation principle implied in Article I, Section 2, though courts may view this as a political question beyond judicial review. Your strongest arguments will connect to existing precedent on equal protection and voting rights rather than relying solely on the original 1:30,000 ratio. Consider retaining a constitutional law attorney experienced in voting rights litigation who can help refine these arguments.

Partnering with organizations like FairVote, Brennan Center for Justice, or Common Cause could provide valuable resources and expertise. These groups have extensive experience with representation issues and might offer legal support or amicus briefs. You might also connect with academics who study this issue, as their research could strengthen your case by showing how the fixed seat cap creates demonstrable representational disparities across different states and populations.