Sisters in Law Podcast #256: "Military On The Street"

Date: October 4, 2025
Host: Politicon
Panelists: Jill Wine-Banks, Barb McQuaid, Joyce Vance (Kimberly Atkins Stohr is out this week)

Episode Overview

This episode previews the upcoming Supreme Court term (October 2025), examining high-stakes cases on presidential power, LGBTQ+ rights, voting rights, and campaign finance. The panel then pivots to urgent developments in government overreach: ICE raids in Chicago, Trump's attempts to use military force domestically, and the legal, constitutional ramifications of these tactics. Finally, the show delves into a landmark First Amendment case protecting non-citizens’ rights, and addresses listener questions about law enforcement powers, shutdowns, and federal agency authorities.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Personal Routines for De-stressing from the News

(00:00–08:04)

• The hosts share their evening routines to decompress from the relentless pace of political and legal news.
  • Barb McQuaid: Sports-themed word puzzles and reading escapism, avoiding news just before bed.
    • "I always like to read either fiction or... a magazine, something that is not news, hard news." (02:33)
  • Jill Wine-Banks & Joyce Vance: NYT Wordle and Connections; Joyce underscores the importance of "little corners of peace and relaxation" (03:27).

2. Supreme Court Term Preview: Key Cases

(08:04–30:53)

a) Presidential Powers & Tariff Authority

• Tariff Case (Nov. 2025): Tests whether Trump's imposition of tariffs (via IEPA—International Emergency Economic Powers Act) was lawful or an unconstitutional congressional power grab.
  • Jill: "This case involves Trump’s signature initiative... the exact powers he’s trying to use may infringe on Congress’s powers under the Constitution." (08:42)

b) Firing Protections for Independent Agency Officials

• Challenge to Humphrey’s Executor Precedent: Revisiting the 1935 case barring presidents from firing independent agency officials, raising stakes for regulatory oversight.
  • Joyce: "The Court doesn’t have to outright reverse Humphrey’s Executor to grow Trump’s power over agencies that won’t fall in line with his views." (13:18)
  • Special distinction may be made for the Federal Reserve's independence.

c) LGBTQ+ Rights—Transgender Sports Participation

• Two Cases: State bans on transgender girls competing on girls' teams challenged on Equal Protection and Title IX grounds.
  • Though trans athletes are less than “ten in 500,000,” bans could affect hundreds of similar pending laws if upheld.
  • Jill: "Many say this is the best case for challenging the state bans. But if the court goes along... there are something like 700 other state laws pending that will be allowed to go into effect." (16:10)
  • Barb/Panel: Culture war concerns, especially over blanket rules that affect very few but heighten divisiveness.
    • "It really just seems like the court, in choosing its cases, is choosing to engage in the culture wars." (19:00)

d) Voting Rights Act—Louisiana v. Calais

• Rehearing on Section 2: Challenges a court-ordered majority-Black district. Ruling could reshape redistricting, potentially “cementing one-party control in the House for a generation.” (21:08)
  • Joyce: "It really could cement Republican political control in a way that nothing since... Shelby County vs. Holder...has impacted our politics." (22:11)
  • Barb: Notes Chief Justice Roberts' pattern of incremental erosion of voting rights.

e) Campaign Finance

• Potential Expansion of Citizens United: New case could let parties coordinate unlimited spending directly with candidates.
  • Jill: "If the court agrees, the practical implication is that presidents...can exert more influence over elections." (24:58)
  • Barb: Raises concern that unlimited spending "goes against this idea of one person, one vote." (26:27)
  • Joyce: Points to Citizens United as a “real tragedy” undermining “the power of one person, one vote.” (27:35)

f) Shadow Docket Concerns

• Increasingly, the Supreme Court is making major, often unreasoned decisions without full transparency.
  • Joyce: "The court is clearly evolving this docket...to a place where it cloisters its decisions in mystery." (28:40)
  • Barb: Critiques secrecy, urges vigilance.

3. Government Overreach: ICE Raids, Military on US Streets, and Weaponization

(34:55–56:47)

a) ICE Raids in Chicago & Abuse of Federal Agencies

• Jill: Details aggressive ICE action—even in affluent suburbs—based on little evidence, with disturbing reports: "They arrested nannies... zip-tied children together... brought out naked people... their apartments had been trashed." (37:56)
• Use of Agencies: Trump using IRS, FCC, and FAA for political advantage.

b) FAA Drone Restrictions for ICE Operations

• Joyce: Explains FAA used standard security powers for temporary drone no-fly zones in Chicago to support ICE (37:05).

c) Trump’s Calls to Use Military as Law Enforcement

• Barb: Cites the Posse Comitatus Act: “It has been a crime to use the military for ordinary law enforcement purposes.” (40:50)
  • Emergencies (e.g., LA riots) are exceptions, but current Trump rhetoric on using the military in cities is an “illegal effort” and an election tactic.
• Panel: See these moves—and the “enemy within” rhetoric—as cynical attempts to polarize and energize Trump’s base for the 2026 midterms.

d) Misinformation about Portland

• Barb: Debunks claims of lawlessness in Portland; local leaders have not requested federal intervention and the city is “not a war zone.” (44:47)
• Jill: Describes Trump using “AI produced video” to fuel disinformation.

e) Incitement, Rules of Engagement, and “Liberation Day”

• Joyce: Warns of Trump and Defense Secretary Hegseth shifting the “Overton Window,” normalizing troops on city streets and “common sense, maximum lethality and authority” (47:49):
  • "This is talk about unleashing American troops on American streets, which is clearly a violation of the Posse Comitatus act." (47:49)
• Panel: Echoes First They Came... poem and warns abuse will spread from immigrants to other marginalized groups.

f) Extrajudicial Attacks on Alleged Drug Boats

• Barb: The killing of alleged traffickers by military strikes has “no legal authority,” even with terrorist designations:
  • "John Yoo...is appalled by this. He thinks this is murder. And I think he’s right." (52:49)
  • Points out lack of evidence, dangerous precedent, and potential for war crimes liability.

4. Notable Quotes & Moments

• Jill Wine-Banks (on ICE raids):
  "ICE agents are all over tourist areas...They zip tied children together. They brought out naked people... and their apartments had been trashed." (37:56)
• Barb McQuaid (on military use):
  "Even just the suggestion of this... is just an effort to, as Trump himself said, make this an issue for the 2026 midterms." (42:21)
• Joyce Vance (on shifting norms):
  "They're trying to shift the window so that Americans view having American soldiers on our streets as just the new normal." (49:04)
• Barb McQuaid (on extrajudicial attacks):
  "Even if all those things are true, there is still no legal authority to blow them out of the water. You just can't do that." (53:22)
• Joyce Vance (on Citizens United):
  "...has done more to erode confidence in the vote and Americans' belief that the system is fair than any other case in the Supreme Court's history." (27:35)
• Jill Wine-Banks (on incitement):
  "Get out of that car and you can do whatever the hell you want to do. That to me is inciting violence." (51:23)

5. Landmark First Amendment Decision for Non-Citizens

(60:15–69:24)

• Case: American Association of University Professors v. Rubio (Judge William G. Young, Boston)

  • Upholds full First Amendment protections for lawfully present non-citizens.
  • "The First Amendment does not draw any distinction between the rights possessed...by citizens and noncitizens." — Jill (61:03)
  • Critiques Trump Administration for chilling speech; judge delivers a fiercely worded, 161-page opinion—both celebrated and critiqued for tone and judicial style.
  • Barb: Calls the opinion “the judicial equivalent of a man opening his porch door and saying, hey, you kids, get off my lawn.” (62:14)
  • Judge lambasts ICE’s use of masked agents:
    “ICE goes mask for a single reason: to terrorize Americans into quiescence. To us, masks are associated with...the despised Ku Klux Klan. In all our history, we have never tolerated an armed, mask secret police...” — Jill quoting Judge Young (66:55)

• Remedy uncertain: judge schedules further hearings given administration’s disregard for prior precedent.

6. Listener Q&A

(74:27–end)

• Where does the FBI get cash for operations?
  Answer: Budgeted/“recycled” operational funds; subjects obligated to report criminal proceeds for taxes. (75:17)
• Government shutdowns—any protection?
  Answer: No real protections; shutdowns harm essential and non-essential workers, disrupt key services; "really no way to run a government." (78:03)
• ICE arrest authority:
  Answer: Immigration and Nationality Act, sec 287 (18 USC 1357); SCOTUS has permitted use of “reasonable suspicion,” which can be racially tinged. (79:57)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:00–08:04 – Panel’s routines for managing news stress
• 08:04–30:53 – Supreme Court term preview: presidential power, LGBTQ+ rights, voting rights, campaign finance, shadow docket
• 34:55–56:47 – Quantico, ICE raids in Chicago, use/abuse of federal agencies, Posse Comitatus, attacks on alleged drug boats
• 60:15–69:24 – First Amendment case for non-citizens; analysis of Judge Young’s opinion
• 74:27–end – Listener Q&A about FBI money, shutdowns, ICE authority

Memorable/Notable Moments

• Joyce: “This isn’t okay. We need to be protesting it. We need to be writing to our elected officials.” (50:01)
• Barb: “It is not authority to just kill them... you just can’t do that.” (53:22)
• Jill: “That, to me, is inciting violence.” (51:23, re: Trump’s order to ICE)
• Judge Young’s quote (read by Jill):
  "...ICE brings indelible obloquy to this administration and everyone who works for it." (66:36)
• On the effect of Citizens United:
  “...the idea that my vote matters as much as, for instance, say, Elon Musk’s vote or Donald Trump’s vote.” — Joyce (27:35)

Conclusion

This episode offers an in-depth, sobering preview of the coming Supreme Court term, underlining profound threats to constitutional checks, civil rights, and the rule of law. The panel sounds alarms about the normalization of governmental brute force, the weaponization of agencies, the ongoing erosion of voting rights, and the urgent need for vigilance and protest. A glimmer of hope emerges from the Boston court’s principled stand on free speech rights for non-citizens, but the panel remains deeply concerned about the health and resilience of American democracy as government powers are stretched—and, often, abused.

Related Episodes & Further Discussion:
Follow #SistersInLaw each week for ongoing analysis as these Supreme Court cases and executive moves unfold.