#SistersInLaw Episode 233: Are We There Yet?

Release Date: April 26, 2025

Introduction: Law Day and the Oath of Lawyers

In this episode, the Sisters in Law—Joyce Vance, Jill Wine-Banks, Barb McQuaid, and Kimberly Atkins Stohr—kick off the discussion by reflecting on Law Day, celebrated on May 1. Host Barb McQuaid invites each panelist to reminisce about their experiences swearing in as lawyers, emphasizing the solemn duty they pledged to uphold the Constitution and serve the public faithfully.

• Joyce Vance (01:41): Shares her emotional memory of being sworn into the Massachusetts bar at the historic Faneuil Hall, highlighting the enduring significance of the legal oath.

  "I specifically remember getting chills as I raised my hand and recited that oath to become a member of the legal profession and an officer of the court." (01:41)

• Kimberly Atkins Stohr (03:02): Discusses taking the oath twice—in Virginia and Alabama—and the profound responsibility it entails to uphold the rule of law.

  "We take democracy for granted. We take the oaths for granted. Now, in this day and age, I think we have to revitalize and restore them." (04:54)

• Jill Wine-Banks (04:56): Recounts being sworn in multiple times across different jurisdictions, underscoring the personal and professional commitment to justice.

  "I am celebrating on May 1 with a reaffirmation of my oath because I think it's so important that the rule of law is in jeopardy right now in America." (06:09)

• Barb McQuaid (07:11): Reflects on her own swearing-in experience and the ethical standards enshrined in the lawyer's oath, critiquing the perceived decline in professionalism among some lawyers.

  "It seems that so many lawyers in the news are not upholding those high standards." (07:11)

Constitutional Crisis: Arrest of Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan

The conversation transitions to a pressing issue that has emerged just hours before recording: the arrest of Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan on charges of obstructing federal immigration enforcement. This unprecedented event raises alarm bells about a potential constitutional crisis.

• Joyce Vance (11:53): Introduces the topic, questioning whether the United States is teetering on the brink of a constitutional crisis.

  "Are we in a constitutional crisis yet? Because it feels like it." (11:53)

• Barb McQuaid (12:58): Analyzes the situation, expressing concern over the federal government's assertion of authority in state courts and the implications for federalism.

  "The idea that she was arrested, to me, is what is so absurd." (12:58)

• Kimberly Atkins Stohr (14:28): Highlights the signs of political showmanship by the FBI and the Justice Department, noting inappropriate conduct by high-ranking officials like Kash Patel.

  "This is about political showmanship, not law." (14:28)

• Jill Wine-Banks (17:16): Agrees with her colleagues, condemning the actions as characteristic of the Trump administration's disregard for legal norms.

  "It is an appalling situation, and only in a Trump administration with Cash Patel as the director of the FBI could this have possibly happened." (17:17)

Supreme Court and Potential Constitutional Crisis

The panel discusses recent Supreme Court actions and their potential role in either mitigating or exacerbating the constitutional crisis.

• Barb McQuaid (18:21): References the Supreme Court's recent decision halting deportations to El Salvador, noting the dissents by Justices Alito and Thomas, which may signal deeper divisions.

  "We are in a constitutional crisis. First, I want to say just a word because that opinion from the Supreme Court came out last week after we were done recording." (18:21)

• Joyce Vance (22:59): Questions the Supreme Court's ability to stand up to presidential overreach, expressing cautious optimism but acknowledging the uncertainty.

  "Do they really have the stones to stand up to this president?" (22:59)

• Kimberly Atkins Stohr (25:19): Shares a somber view on the Supreme Court's potential response, emphasizing concerns over the justices' willingness to counter executive overreach.

  "I really don't want to answer it. I hate reading the tea leaves. ... I think there are still five votes for democracy on the Supreme Court." (25:19)

Trump’s Executive Orders: Transgender Military Ban and Voting Regulations

The Sisters delve into President Trump's executive orders targeting transgender individuals in the military and imposing stringent voting regulations, examining the legal and societal ramifications.

• Jill Wine-Banks (28:36): Details an emergency Supreme Court appeal regarding Trump's executive order banning transgender individuals from military service, critiquing the lack of evidence for purported military cohesion issues.

  "They will create a distraction that it it will harm military read and cohesion." (28:36)

• Barb McQuaid (30:56): Highlights Judge Benjamin Settle's ruling against the transgender military ban, underscoring its violation of the Equal Protection Clause and other constitutional protections.

  "He said that transgender service members who had sued had raised serious questions about the ban as to their constitutionality under the equal protection clause." (30:56)

• Joyce Vance (33:24): Points out that concerns about conduct in the military already exist and should be addressed without targeting specific groups.

  "There are a lot of questions about that. But there's nothing about these people that says they are not fulfilling the standards that we need to have military readiness." (33:24)

• Barb McQuaid (34:19): Criticizes the underlying motives of the transgender ban as part of broader culture wars aimed at diminishing transgender rights and presence in society.

  "This really is about the culture wars, right? This is really because the Trump administration doesn't want to pay for surgery for transgender people on their watch." (34:19)

Voting Rights and Executive Orders

The discussion shifts to Trump's executive order attempting to impose stricter voting regulations, which has faced significant legal challenges and partial injunctions.

• Kimberly Atkins Stohr (40:58): Summarizes Trump's executive order that seeks to mandate stricter voter registration requirements, including presenting official documents like passports or birth certificates.

  "Donald Trump thinks he can in an executive order direct a division of an election commission on the federal level that is really just meant to facilitate the carrying out of federal elections." (40:58)

• Barb McQuaid (44:22): Explains the concept of an injunction and how the courts have responded to block Trump's order, emphasizing the judiciary's role in maintaining the separation of powers.

  "The Constitution entrusts Congress and the states, not the president, with the authority to regulate federal elections." (44:22)

• Jill Wine-Banks (47:37): Discusses the potential for the Supreme Court to uphold the injunction, reflecting on the clear constitutional boundaries set regarding election oversight.

  "The Constitution couldn't be clearer in saying what the role of the states is in creating election rules, and only in the case where Congress can sort of challenge them on some things." (47:37)

• Kimberly Atkins Stohr (48:14): Expresses skepticism about the Supreme Court's impartiality, hinting at a lack of confidence in the justices' willingness to counteract executive overreach.

  "Justice Alito or Justice Thomas can summon when they write for the majority." (48:14)

Questions & Answers: Contempt, Pardons, and Court Packing

The episode features a Q&A segment where listeners inquire about various legal topics, including contempt charges, presidential pardons, and the possibility of court-packing.

1. Contempt of Court (55:09)

   • Kimberly Atkins Stohr: Explains that contempt findings are rare, especially in federal courts, where judges prefer to maintain integrity and judicial authority.

     "In federal courts, the judges are very hesitant to hold parties in contempt. They really try to give them every opportunity to do the right thing." (55:09)

2. Presidential Pardons (57:45)

   • Jill Wine-Banks: Discusses the disturbing potential for a president to issue blanket pardons to absolve the administration from any contempt or wrongdoing, underscoring the need for constitutional safeguards.

     "The sad thing is that if he gets away with it, he's already immune from criminal actions that he takes as part of his constitutional responsibilities." (57:45)

3. Court Packing (58:59)

   • Joyce Vance (58:59): Analyzes the feasibility of court-packing, noting the significant legislative hurdles due to narrow congressional majorities.

     "Packing the court or adding more justices to the court would require an act of Congress. That's it." (58:59)

Conclusion and Upcoming Events

The episode wraps up with promotional segments for sponsors and upcoming events, including a book talk moderated by Joyce Vance in Birmingham on June 23rd. The Sisters emphasize the importance of staying informed and engaged in legal and political matters to uphold democracy.

"We have a lot of choices. I might need to take you to Barbecue for break breakfast, which is a thing here. I'm in Take out someplace else the night before. But yeah, if you're in Birmingham or if you're in the Southeast, come and see Barb McQuaid at Little Professor Books in Birmingham." (61:04)

Notable Quotes with Timestamps:

• "We take democracy for granted. We take the oaths for granted." — Barb McQuaid (04:54)
• "This is about political showmanship, not law." — Kimberly Atkins Stohr (14:28)
• "It is an appalling situation, and only in a Trump administration with Cash Patel as the director of the FBI could this have possibly happened." — Jill Wine-Banks (17:17)
• "This really is about the culture wars, right? This is really because the Trump administration doesn't want to pay for surgery for transgender people on their watch." — Barb McQuaid (34:19)
• "The Constitution couldn't be clearer in saying what the role of the states is in creating election rules." — Jill Wine-Banks (47:37)
• "We're in a constitutional crisis... this is serious times. This is dark times in America." — Kimberly Atkins Stohr (48:14)

Key Discussions and Insights:

1. Law Day Reflections: The panelists emphasize the gravity and personal significance of the legal oath, advocating for a renewed commitment to constitutional principles amidst current political turmoil.

2. Judicial Overreach and Federalism: The arrest of Judge Hannah Dugan is analyzed as a potential breach of federalism, highlighting tensions between state courts and federal authorities under the Trump administration.

3. Supreme Court's Role: Concerns are raised about the Supreme Court's ability to resist executive overreach, especially with justices like Alito and Thomas dissenting in key cases.

4. Transgender Military Ban: The executive order banning transgender individuals from military service is critiqued for its lack of legal foundation and its roots in broader societal discrimination.

5. Voting Rights Executive Order: Trump's attempt to impose stringent voter registration requirements is portrayed as an unconstitutional power grab, with courts swiftly issuing injunctions to block its implementation.

6. Potential Constitutional Crisis: The cumulative effect of these executive actions and judicial responses suggests a tipping point towards a constitutional crisis, with leaders questioning the resilience of democratic institutions.

7. Listener Engagement: The Q&A segment addresses critical legal questions, reinforcing the panelists' expertise and the podcast's role in educating its audience on complex legal issues.

Conclusions:

The Sisters in Law underscore the fragility of democratic institutions in the face of executive overreach and judicial anomalies. They advocate for vigilance, legal integrity, and active civic engagement to preserve constitutional principles. The episode serves as a clarion call for lawyers and citizens alike to reaffirm their commitment to upholding the rule of law, especially during tumultuous times.

Listeners are encouraged to engage with the Sisters in Law through their social media channels and stay informed by following future episodes. Additionally, various sponsors supporting the podcast are highlighted, offering resources and products aligned with the show's values.