The Political Thicket | Radiolab Presents: More Perfect Podcast | Season 1 Episode 2

On this episode, the case that pushed one Supreme Court justice to a nervous breakdown, brought a boiling feud to a head, and changed the course of the Supreme Court forever.
When Chief Justice Earl Warren was asked at the end of his career, “What was the most important case of your tenure?,” there were a lot of answers he could have given. After all, he had presided over some of the most important decisions in the court’s history - cases that dealt with segregation in schools, the right to an attorney, the right to remain silent, just to name a few. But his answer was a surprise: He said, “Baker v. Carr,” a 1962 redistricting case.
On this episode of More Perfect, we talk about why this case was so important - important enough, in fact, that it pushed one Supreme Court justice to a nervous breakdown, brought a boiling feud to a head, put one justice in the hospital, and changed the course of the Supreme Court - and the nation - forever.
More Perfect is a spin-off series from Radiolab about how the Supreme Court got so supreme.
🎧 Subscribe to Radiolab wherever you listen to podcasts: bit.ly/3trXDLe
🔎 Subscribe to Radiolab on RUclips: bit.ly/3I9KI53
🌱 Check out Radiolab's Starter Kit Playlist: bit.ly/3sX8f4P
👍 Like this video ✏️ and leave us a comment!
Follow Radiolab:
Instagram - / radiolab
Twitter - / radiolab
Facebook - / radiolab
Support Radiolab by becoming a member of The Lab today: www.wnycstudio...
Illustration by Mitch Boyer of Charles Evans Whittaker, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1957-1962.
Video by Michael Snyder, Kim Nowacki and Andrea Latimer.

[@CSCoolidge]

I find myself in agreement with the student who said that if _Bush v. Gore_ is the price we have to pay for _Baker v. Carr_, it's a price I'm willing to pay; however, I have a feeling that the current politicization has nothing to do with specific prior doctrines or decisions but is qualitatively different and new and dangerous, because it doesn't seem to be truly ideological in any thoughtful sense but is across-the-board outcome-oriented. I'm a little nostalgic for the placid days at the turn of the 20th to the 21st century when, even while picking a winner in a quintessentially partisan controversy, the Court took pains to dress up their decision with copious offerings of fatted reasoning.

[@Livelife424]

So easy to see how the delema could break someone. But his final years were good. My dad would tell me stories of speding time on the farm with his grandpa 😊

[@TSquared2001]

Sobering

[@augurcybernaut4785]

See you in 2024