The winner-take-all method of allocating electoral votes in presidential races is the norm among states, yet nowhere in the Constitution is this practice mandated. This article contends that the winner-take-all allocation of electors unconstitutionally magnifies the battleground states' influence on the final Electoral College tally and that these inequities cannot be reconciled with the principle of one-person, one-vote that the US Supreme Court articulated in the landmark Reynolds v. Sims. In 1966 the Supreme Court declined to hear a case contesting the constitutionality of the winner-take-all system based on the one person, one vote, principle. It is time for the Court to reconsider this issue, otherwise the Electoral College results from the 2008 election can be expected to bring a fresh set of inequities, at further cost to one-person, one-vote.