Radiolab Podcast Summary: "Sex, Ducks and the Founding Feud"

Release Date: June 27, 2025
Hosts: Lulu Miller and Latif Nasser
Produced by: WNYC Studios

Introduction: Revisiting a Foundational Legal Feud

In the episode titled "Sex, Ducks and the Founding Feud," Radiolab delves deep into the intricate dynamics of federalism in the United States, intertwining a personal tale of betrayal with a pivotal Supreme Court case. Hosts Lulu Miller and Latif Nasser guide listeners through a narrative that not only entertains but also illuminates the enduring conflicts between state and federal powers.

The Tangled Web of Betrayal and Poison

The story centers around Carol Ann Bond, a 36-year-old microbiologist from suburban Philadelphia. Carol discovers that her husband has been unfaithful with her best friend, Merlinda Haynes, who is now pregnant with his child. Overwhelmed by rage and betrayal, Carol embarks on a vengeful path, repeatedly attempting to poison Merlinda.

• Duncan Hollis introduces the case:
  "Carol Ann Bond, 36, lives in a suburb of Philly... she tried to poison her best friend repeatedly."
  (05:03)

Carol meticulously gathers toxic chemicals, including arsenic, some sourced from her workplace and others ordered online. She targets Merlinda by spreading these substances on doorknobs, mailboxes, and even car doors, totaling 24 powder attacks over six months. Despite her attempts, Merlinda sustains only minor injuries, and Carol's actions eventually draw legal attention.

A Landmark Constitutional Clash: Missouri vs. Holland

To understand the legal ramifications of Carol's case, Radiolab takes a step back to explore the Missouri vs. Holland (1920) Supreme Court decision, which fundamentally shaped the balance of power between state and federal governments.

The 1919 Duck Shooting Incident

In rural Missouri, Frank McAllister, the state's Attorney General, and his friends engage in the rampant hunting of ducks, amassing 76 birds in a single spree. Their actions, though sanctioned by state law, attract the attention of Ray Holland, a federal game warden, who asserts that these ducks are not private property and thus cannot be hunted under state jurisdiction.

• Nick Rosenkrans explains the onset of the conflict:
  "You can shoot the ducks. So they're out there, they're having this great time... But the game warden says, no, it's not your property."
  (21:14)

Holland arrests the hunters, leading to a courtroom battle over the jurisdiction of federal treaties versus state laws.

The Supreme Court's Decision

Referencing the historic case, the episode highlights Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.'s pivotal role in upholding the Migratory Bird Treaty Act through the lens of the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, which declares treaties as the "supreme law of the land."

• Robert Krulwich summarizes Holmes' stance:
  "We spent all this sweat and blood to figure out what kind of nation we were going to become for birds."
  (23:18)

This decision affirmed the federal government's authority to regulate activities that cross state lines or have national significance, setting a precedent for future federal interventions.

Connecting the Dots: Carol Ann Bond's Federal Charge

Drawing parallels between the Missouri case and Carol's actions, Radiolab illustrates how federal authorities leveraged the International Chemical Weapons Treaty to prosecute her for using toxic chemicals, despite the local nature of her crimes.

• Latif Nasser poses a critical question:
  "It's a document which allows us to continue to discuss and debate the core issues that we face."
  (14:24)

By classifying Carol's poisoning attempts under an international treaty, the federal government extended its reach into what would traditionally be considered state jurisdiction, reigniting debates about the extent of federal power.

Debate and Implications: Federalism in Modern America

The episode navigates the complex terrain of federalism, questioning whether treaties and federal laws should have supremacy over state decisions in all matters. It juxtaposes historical precedents with contemporary issues, such as educational standards and environmental regulations, highlighting the ongoing tug-of-war between centralized authority and state autonomy.

• Joseph J. Ellis reflects on the Constitution's flexibility:
  "The Constitution isn't a set of answers. It's a framework for argument."
  (14:21)

Experts like John Bellinger, a legal advisor and constitutional scholar, weigh in, emphasizing the practical limitations and the necessity of federal cooperation in an increasingly interconnected world.

Conclusion: The Aftermath and Ongoing Debates

In a twist revealed towards the episode's end, the Supreme Court revisits Carol Ann Bond's case, ultimately ruling unanimously that she did not violate the Chemical Weapons Convention Treaty. This decision leaves many questions about federal overreach unanswered, ensuring that the debate over federal versus state power remains as relevant as ever.

• Latif Nasser concludes:
  "So lucky for us, we can keep arguing about it for another hundred years."
  (29:58)

Carol's personal turmoil and the legal battle that ensued serve as a microcosm for America's enduring struggle to balance individual actions with overarching national laws.

Notable Quotes

• Duncan Hollis on the nature of the federal charge:
  "But to charge her with an international treaty violation, it just seems, it seems too big for the little lady."
  (08:19)

• Kelsey Padgett on Madison's constitutional philosophy:
  "This is an argument that was actually literally written into our founding document. In some sense, we are, as a country, the product of that argument."
  (15:36)

• Joseph J. Ellis on the Constitution's adaptability:
  "The Constitution isn't a set of answers. It's a framework for argument."
  (14:21)

Final Thoughts

"Sex, Ducks and the Founding Feud" masterfully intertwines a gripping personal narrative with a significant legal and historical examination, offering listeners a nuanced understanding of federalism's complexities. Through engaging storytelling and insightful analysis, Radiolab underscores the persistent relevance of foundational debates in shaping contemporary American society.