#SistersInLaw Episode 219: "TikTok Ticking Away" Summary

Release Date: January 18, 2025
Host/Author: Politicon
Title: #SistersInLaw
Episode: 219: TikTok Ticking Away

Introduction

In Episode 219 of #SistersInLaw, the Politicon team—Joyce Vance, Jill Wine-Banks, Barb McQuaid, and Kimberly Atkins Stohr—delve deep into significant developments impacting American politics, law, and culture. This episode primarily focuses on the Supreme Court's landmark decision on TikTok, the recent confirmation hearings of key Trump appointees, and insights from the Jack Smith report on the January 6th investigation.

Supreme Court’s TikTok Decision

Key Discussion Points:

• Ruling Overview: The Supreme Court issued a per curiam decision upholding a law banning TikTok in the United States unless it divests from its Chinese parent company by January 19th, 2025. The court balanced TikTok’s role as a major platform for American expression against national security concerns.

• Per Curiam Explained: Joyce Vance (00:10:12) explains that a per curiam opinion signifies a unanimous decision without individual justices signing the opinion, often indicating court unity, though in this case, it might reflect expediency amid tight deadlines.

• First Amendment vs. National Security: Jill Wine-Banks (00:14:17) breaks down the constitutional standards applied, noting that the court deemed the TikTok ban as a content-neutral regulation satisfying intermediate scrutiny given the compelling national security interests.

Notable Quotes:

• Joyce Vance (11:58): “All of the justices on the court join in the opinion, but no one justice signs it. Sometimes it's a way that the court just says, we're united behind this decision.”

• Barb McQuaid (17:08): “...TikTok can continue, but only if they divest from this Chinese company.”

Insights:

• The decision underscores the judiciary’s stance on balancing freedom of expression with national security.
• Concurrences by Justice Sotomayor and Justice Gorsuch highlighted separate concerns about foreign propaganda, though they agreed with the main decision based on data security alone.

Confirmation Hearings of Trump Appointees

Pam Bondi for Attorney General

Key Discussion Points:

• Performance Critique: The panel criticized Bondi’s demeanor during her confirmation hearing, highlighting her perceived loyalty to former President Donald Trump over constitutional duties.

• Evasiveness and Snarkiness: Both Joyce Vance (28:01) and Jill Wine-Banks (31:38) pointed out Bondi’s reluctance to acknowledge Joe Biden’s legitimate election victory and her dismissive responses to senators’ questions.

• Ethics Concerns: Barb McQuaid (33:20) and others noted Bondi’s repeated deferrals to ethics officials, raising concerns about her commitment to upholding ethical standards independently of political pressures.

Notable Quotes:

• Jill Wine-Banks (31:38): “She was rude beyond belief, dismissive of senators... completely unfit for the job.”

• Kimberly Atkins Stohr (28:01): “She refused to say that Joe Biden won in 2020 fair and square.”

Insights:

• Bondi’s confirmation raised alarms about the potential erosion of institutional integrity within the Department of Justice.
• Her responses suggested a prioritization of political allegiance over impartial legal enforcement.

Russell Vogt and Pete Hegseth’s Confirmation Hearings

Key Discussion Points:

• Russell Vogt: Returning to the Office of Management and Budget, Vogt is identified as a key architect of "Project 2025," raising concerns about his past actions and allegiance to former administration policies.

• Pete Hegseth: Facing multiple accusations ranging from mismanagement to personal misconduct, Hegseth's fitness to lead the Department of Defense (DoD) is heavily questioned. The panel emphasized his lack of qualifications and inappropriate stance on women in combat roles.

Notable Quotes:

• Kimberly Atkins Stohr (40:33): “He does not know that a SEAN is an important negotiation partner for the Pentagon.”

• Jill Wine-Banks (44:10): “He didn't even know the names of the military organizations he would be negotiating with.”

Insights:

• The confirmations signify a potential shift towards politicized appointments, possibly undermining departmental efficacy and ethical standards.
• The panel expressed deep concerns about the impact of these appointees on military integrity and public service morale.

Jack Smith Report on January 6th Investigation

Key Discussion Points:

• Volume One Insights: The panel discussed the findings regarding Donald Trump's actions leading up to the January 6th insurrection. The report indicated that while there was sufficient evidence to pursue charges, prosecutorial discretion was exercised due to Trump's reelection.

• Volume Two Concerns: There is a contentious debate about the release of additional details concerning co-defendants, with Joyce Vance (62:35) advocating for the release to preserve historical integrity despite potential executive interference.

Notable Quotes:

• Joyce Vance (56:31): “Half of the American public was willing to vote for him nonetheless. This sort of gangster worship cult that's grown up around Trump is so deeply disturbing.”

• Barb McQuaid (58:03): “Russell Vogt I put at the top of the list is unqualified, but right up there with Hegseth and Bondi.”

Insights:

• The report serves as a critical historical document, highlighting systemic failures in preventing the insurrection.
• Concerns about executive influence on prosecutorial processes underscore the fragility of legal institutions in maintaining checks and balances.

Audience Q&A

1. FBI Background Checks on Nominees

• Question (71:52): "Why hasn't the FBI done a complete background check on Pete Hegseth and other nominees?"
• Answer (Jill Wine-Banks, 71:52): The FBI's investigation is constrained by presidential directives, limiting the breadth of inquiries to favorable candidates, reminiscent of past oversight failures like the Kavanaugh hearings.

2. Presidential Appeals of Felony Convictions

• Question (73:58): "If Donald Trump cannot face a trial during his presidency, does he also have to wait until his presidential term is completed before he can pursue an appeal of his felony convictions?"
• Answer (Joyce Vance, 73:58): While technically possible, practical and procedural delays make post-presidency appeals unlikely, risking case abandonment.

3. Supreme Court Case Timeliness

• Question (76:11): "Why do some cases get before the Supreme Court in the blink of an eye and others do not? It seems to be random."
• Answer (Kimberly Atkins Stohr, 76:11): Case timing depends on urgency, docket availability, and strategic judicial priorities. The expedited handling of the TikTok case was due to imminent legislative deadlines.

Conclusions and Final Thoughts

The #SistersInLaw team delivered a comprehensive analysis of pivotal legal and political developments. Their discussions highlighted the Supreme Court's decisive stance on TikTok as a measure against national security threats, raised significant concerns over the integrity of recent Trump appointee confirmations, and scrutinized the implications of the Jack Smith report on the January 6th events.

Key Takeaways:

• Judiciary’s Role: The Supreme Court continues to play a critical role in balancing constitutional rights with national security needs.
• Political Appointments: Recent confirmations signal potential challenges to institutional integrity and bipartisan cooperation within key government departments.
• Legal Accountability: The Jack Smith report underscores ongoing struggles in maintaining legal accountability amidst political pressures.

Notable Final Quote:

• Joyce Vance (68:02): “We just can't be naive anymore. We shouldn't violate the law. We have to operate within the legal framework, but we can't be naive.”

Additional Resources

For further insights and detailed analyses, listeners are encouraged to engage with the hosts on their social media platforms or submit questions via email at sistersinlaw@politicon.com.

This episode offers a critical lens on the intersection of law, politics, and societal norms, providing listeners with a thorough understanding of the current landscape and its future implications.