More than 30 years ago, a Native American man named Al Smith was fired for ingesting peyote at a religious ceremony. When his battle made it to the Supreme Court, the decision set off a thorny debate over when religious people get to sidestep the law — a debate we’re still having today.
Voices in the episode include:
• Garrett Epps — University of Oregon Law School professor
• Ka’ila Farrell-Smith — Al Smith’s daughter, visual artist
• Jane Farrell — Al Smith's widow, retired early childhood specialist
• Galen Black — Al Smith’s former coworker
• Steven C. Moore — senior staff attorney at the Native American Rights Fund
• Craig J. Dorsay — lawyer who argued Al Smith’s case before the Supreme Court
• Dan Mach — director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief
Learn more:
• 1963: Sherbert v. Verner
• 1990: Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith
• 2022: 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis
• "Peyote vs the State: Religious Freedom On Trial" by Garrett Epps
• Factsheet: Religious Freedom Restoration Act Of 1993, The Bridge Initiative at Georgetown University
• Our History, the Klamath Tribes 
Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School.
Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund.
Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

The Supreme Court v. Peyote

We’re taught the Supreme Court was designed to be above the fray of politics. But at a time when partisanship seeps into every pore of American life, are the nine justices living up to that promise? More Perfect is a guide to the current moment on the Court. We bring the highest court of the land down to earth, telling the human dramas at the Court that shape so many aspects of American life — from our religious freedom to our artistic expression, from our reproductive choices to our voice in democracy.

Society & Culture

Personal Journals

History

Philosophy

Places & Travel

Education

Training

Language Courses

Higher Education

K-12

Educational Technology

Documentary

Courses

The law protects creators' original work against copycats, but it also leaves the door open for some kinds of copying. When a photographer sues the Andy Warhol Foundation for using her work without permission, the justices struggle not to play art critics as they decide the case. More Perfect explores how this star-studded case offers a look at how this Court actually makes decisions.
Voices in the episode include:
• David Hobbs — known as Mr. Mixx, co-founder of the hip-hop group 2 Live Crew
• Jerry Saltz — senior art critic and columnist for New York magazine
• Pierre Leval — judge on U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
• Jeannie Suk Gersen — More Perfect legal advisor, Harvard Law professor, New Yorker writer
• Lynn Goldsmith — photographer
• Andy Warhol — as himself
Learn more:
• 1994: Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.
• 2023: Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith
• "Toward A Fair Use Standard" by Pierre Leval
• The Andy Warhol Foundation
 
Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo.
Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School.
Click here to donate to More Perfect.
Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund.
Follow us on Instagram, Threads and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and X (Twitter) @moreperfect.

Andy Warhol and the Art of Judging Art

In 1902, a Swedish-American pastor named Henning Jacobson refused to get the smallpox vaccine. This launched a chain of events leading to two landmark Supreme Court cases, in which the Court considered the balancing act between individual liberty over our bodies and the collective good.
A version of this story originally ran on The Experiment on March 21, 2021.
Voices in the episode include:
• Rev. Robin Lutjohann — pastor of Faith Lutheran Church in Cambridge, Massachusetts
• Michael Willrich — Brandeis University history professor
• Wendy Parmet — Northeastern University School of Law professor
Learn more:
• 1905: Jacobson v. Massachusetts
• 1927: Buck v. Bell
• 2022: National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration
• 2022: Biden v. Missouri
• "Pox: An American History" by Michael Willrich
• "Constitutional Contagion: COVID, the Courts, and Public Health" by Wendy Parmet
 
Music by Ob (“Wold”), Parish Council (“Leaving the TV on at Night,” “Museum Weather,” “P Lachaise”), Alecs Pierce (“Harbour Music, Parts I & II”), Laundry (“Lawn Feeling”), water feature (“richard iii (duke of gloucester)”), Keyboard (“Mu”), and naran ratan (“Forevertime Journeys”), provided by Tasty Morsels. Additional music by Dieterich Buxtehude (“Prelude and Fugue in D Major”), Johannes Brahms (“Quintet for Clarinet, Two Violins, Viola, and Cello in B Minor”), and Andrew Eric Halford and Aidan Mark Laverty (“Edge of a Dream”). 
Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo.
Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School.
Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund.
Follow us on Instagram, Threads and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and X (Twitter) @moreperfect.

The Original Anti-Vaxxer

Dred Scott v. Sandford is one of the most infamous cases in Supreme Court history: in 1857, an enslaved person named Dred Scott filed a suit for his freedom and lost. In his decision, Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney wrote that Black men “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” One Civil War and more than a century later, the Taneys and the Scotts reunite at a Hilton in Missouri to figure out what reconciliation looks like in the 21st century.
Voices in the episode include:
• Lynne Jackson — great-great-granddaughter of Dred and Harriet Scott, and president and founder of the Dred Scott Heritage Foundation
• Dred Scott Madison — great-great-grandson of Dred Scott
• Barbara McGregory — great-great-granddaughter of Dred Scott
• Charlie Taney — great-great-grandnephew of Roger Brooke Taney, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who wrote the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision
• Richard Josey — Manager of Programs at the Minnesota Historical Society
Learn more:
• 1857: Dred Scott v. Sandford
• The Dred Scott Heritage Foundation
 
Special thanks to Kate Taney Billingsley, whose play, "A Man of His Time," inspired the episode; and to Soren Shade for production help. Additional music for this episode by Gyan Riley.
Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo.
Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School.
Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund.
Follow us on Instagram, Threads and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

Not Even Past: Dred Scott Reprise

David Souter is one of the most private, low-profile justices ever to have served on the Supreme Court. He rarely gives interviews or speeches. Yet his tenure was anything but low profile. Deemed a “home run” nominee by Republicans, Souter defied partisan expectations on the bench and ultimately ceded his seat to a Democratic president.
In this episode, the story of how “No More Souters” became a rallying cry for Republicans and inspired a backlash that would change the Court forever.
Voices in the episode include:
• Ashley Lopez — NPR political correspondent
• Anna Sale — host of WNYC Studios' Death, Sex & Money podcast
• Tinsley Yarbrough — author and former political science professor at East Carolina University
• Heather Gerken — Dean of Yale Law School and former Justice Souter clerk
• Kermit Roosevelt III — professor at University of Pennsylvania School of Law and former Justice Souter clerk
• Judge Peter Rubin — Associate Justice on Massachusetts Appeals Court and former Justice Souter clerk
• Governor John H. Sununu — former governor of New Hampshire and President George H.W. Bush’s Chief of Staff
Learn more:
• 1992: Planned Parenthood v. Casey
• 1992: Lee v. Weisman
• 2000: Bush v. Gore
• 2009: Citizens United v. FEC
 
Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo.
Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School.
Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund.
Follow us on Instagram, Threads and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

No More Souters

Recently, On the Media’s Micah Loewinger was called to testify in court. He had reported on militia groups who’d helped lead the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Now the government was using his work as evidence in a case against them. Micah wanted nothing to do with it — he worried that participating in the trial would signal to sources that he couldn’t be trusted, which would compromise his work.
As he considered his options, he uncovered a 1972 case called Branzburg v. Hayes. It involved New York Times reporter Earl Caldwell, who was approached multiple times by the FBI to testify against sources in the Black Panther Party. His case — and its decision — transformed the relationship between journalists and the government.
Voices in the episode include:
• Micah Loewinger — correspondent for WNYC Studios' On the Media
• Earl Caldwell — former New York Times reporter
• Lee Levine — attorney and media law expert
• Congressman Jamie Raskin — representing Maryland’s 8th District
Learn more:
• 1972: Branzburg v. Hayes
• Listen to On the Media's "Seditious Conspiracy" episode. Subscribe to On the Media here.
Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo.
Special thanks to the Maynard Institute For Journalism Education for allowing the use of its Earl Caldwell oral history. 
Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School.
Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund.
Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

The Supreme Court v. Peyote

Download our free app to listen on your phone