Sisters in Law – Episode 272: "ICE Freezes Out The 4th Amendment"

Politicon | January 24, 2026

Overview

This episode unpacks several alarming legal and political developments in the U.S., with a primary focus on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reportedly bypassing Fourth Amendment protections during home raids in Minnesota. The hosts—Barb McQuade, Joyce Vance, Kimberly Atkins Stohr, and Jill Wine-Banks—analyse the legal underpinnings of these ICE practices, reflect on federal response to church-based protests, and parse the implications of a high-profile Supreme Court argument regarding Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook's job security. The episode is rich with contextual explanations, memorable moments of frustration and dark humor, and pointed reminders about the stakes of the upcoming 2026 midterms.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. ICE Raids and the Fourth Amendment (08:14–18:09)

• Reporting: ICE agents in Minnesota are entering homes with only administrative warrants (not signed by an independent judge) to arrest individuals with deportation orders. This is based on an Office of Legal Counsel memo obtained by AP via whistleblowers (08:14).

  • Jill: “My first arguments in court…were on the Fourth Amendment. And so I really am a big fan of its protections…they would be free to just, hey, I want to get this person, I'm going to knock down their door.” (08:14)
  • The memo’s secrecy led to a training officer’s resignation over ethical concerns.

• Constitutional Context:

  • The Fourth Amendment requires search warrants to be signed by a neutral judicial officer and based on probable cause—not by people on "the same team" as the enforcement officers.
    • Kimberly: “It's meant in part to keep the foxes from guarding the hen houses. Right?...That is not in comporting with what the framers had in mind here at all.” (11:34)
    • Joyce: “A search warrant has to be signed by a judicial officer…not someone who’s involved in investigating the case.” (14:38)

• Legal Barriers to Redress:

  • Even if rights are violated, it may be hard to sue or enjoin ICE conduct due to qualified immunity and current Supreme Court limitations on remedies (16:45).
    • Joyce: “What’s really necessary here is a vehicle for telling ICE…going forward, you guys can’t do this. You want to go into a house, get a search warrant. Y'all know how it's done, or at least you used to.” (17:02)

2. Protest at Minnesota Church & Federal Charges (18:14–29:40)

• The Incident: Protesters interrupted a Sunday church service after discovering a top ICE official was a pastor there, protesting the killing of Renee Goode by ICE (18:14).

• Unusual Federal Charges:

  • FACE Act: Usually protects access to abortion clinics but also protects religious worship.
    • Jill: “The law does say that…when they entered and interrupted the service, that they were violating the FACE Act. And…the name is kind of misleading…” (18:53)
  • KKK Act (Ku Klux Klan Act): Designed to protect civil rights; now flipped to target left-wing protestors for allegedly infringing religious rights.
    • Kim: “They’re bringing this now under a claim that these protesters…were somehow taking someone’s privileges, immunities, or protections away due to their religious beliefs, which…was not, in fact, the case.” (21:17)

• Specific Arrests:

  • Local NAACP president Nekima Levy Armstrong, a school board member, and others arrested; denied pretrial detention by a judge (24:33).
  • Former CNN anchor Don Lemon joined but was ultimately not charged, successfully asserting his First Amendment rights as a journalist (26:18, 27:31).
    • Kim: “Those protections don't help you in real time…It's after you've already really suffered the problem that the First Amendment was supposed to protect you from.” (27:31)

• Broader Strategy and Chilling Effect:

  • The administration’s use of progressive statutes against protestors stirs fears of chilling dissent and press coverage.
  • Joyce: “Doing this in this way gave the administration…a free throw…And we don’t need to be giving them free throws.” (29:40)

3. Lisa Cook, Federal Reserve, and Supreme Court Showdown (36:58–48:59)

• Background: Trump is attempting to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook (a Black woman), alleging (unproven) mortgage fraud. The Supreme Court appears skeptical, and even Trump appointee Brett Kavanaugh questions the administration’s position.

  • Joyce: “This is a case where a banana republic dictator…is using…prosecutors to pursue his own ends. The warning signs are all here.” (39:19)

• Unitary Executive Theory: Trump’s solicitor general argued presidents can fire anyone at will in federal agencies and that courts can't review such firings (40:04).

  • Barb: “He thought this was ridiculous. You could just bet [Trump]’s fuming...He owes me loyalty. What is this?” (41:06)
  • Kavanaugh: Cautioned this would lead to total evisceration of independent agencies: “What goes around comes around.” (41:36)
  • Kim and Jill: Noted the absurdity of claiming a Truth Social post as legal notice to fire an official (42:44, 43:11).

• Fed Independence & Real-World Implications: Multiple justices (including Kavanaugh) pressed how vital it is for the Fed to be free from political control for economic stability.

  • Jill: “Our economy depends on experts making independent long term judgments...not acting on the president’s short term political goals.” (45:27)

• Remedies for Real Misconduct: Removal “for cause,” with due process and notice—a real legal process, not mere presidential whim or online denunciation (48:27).

  • Barb: “Cause is not just that the President says, I believe...That is not. He would have to have charges brought and proved.” (48:59)

4. DOJ, Social Security Data & Election Fears (53:44–62:23)

• Self-Reporting: DOJ disclosed in court that Social Security Administration data may have been inappropriately accessed by a DOJ team (DOGE) and possibly leaked to election-influencing advocacy groups.

  • Jill: “This is the Department of Justice actually admitting its own misleading of the court...It lays out how Social Security and DOGE may have misused the data...Now they may have given this to a team looking at how to affect elections. This is a real danger.” (53:44)

• Whistleblowers and Protective Action:

  • Career DOJ attorneys reported the disclosure to fulfill their duty of candor—an unusual and brave act.
  • Barb: “I think they discovered this, like, to their horror...it appears that when DOGE was doing its work, it may have done exactly what people have always suspected...” (55:48)

• Risks for Whistleblowers: Concern about possible retaliation against career DOJ lawyers who did the right thing (57:16, 58:36).

• Scandal Unfolding: Kim predicts: if individuals’ data was misused, lawsuits and/or congressional inquiry will follow—if political will exists after the midterms (58:36).

  • Jill: “DOGE was never about stopping fraud…they have not reduced any fraud...They cost us more than they've saved us…voting rights are at risk.” (61:12)

5. Listener Q&A Highlights (65:21–71:58)

• Congressional Investigations:

  • Kim: “Congress can open an investigation into this right now and use their power, including the subpoena power, to get access to evidence in this case.” (66:28)

• Suppression of Illegally Obtained Evidence (Reporter’s Devices):

  • Joyce: “By and large the rule here is going to be excluding the evidence from the government's case...often if you’re a prosecutor and your evidence gets excluded…your case is over.” (67:46)

• Miranda Warnings & Immigration Arrests:

  • Barb: “Miranda warnings are required if there is a custodial interrogation…In most of these immigration cases there's not going to be any trial, there's not going to be any questioning.” (70:09)

Notable Quotes & Moments

• Jill on ICE Memo:
  “A neutral arbiter is essential, because there are mistakes, even when you go to court and convince them that there's probable cause…Now you don't even have to get it reviewed. You just say, I want it, and you get it from your own agency.” (09:08)

• Kim on Fourth Amendment:
  “Those set out legal standards. And so for that to be, you know…if just to allow ICE agents to say…Trust us, we have this—that isn’t what the framers had in mind.” (11:13)

• Joyce on Judicial Review:
  “The Fourth Amendment provides that law enforcement cannot search your home without a search warrant. That has been supported with probable cause…ICE can't just blow past the Fourth Amendment…” (13:37)

• Kim on DOJ Data Use:
  “If somebody’s identity or information was compromised and they were harmed, there will be a lawsuit…Also Congress…should already be setting a hearing.” (58:36)

• Kavanaugh (quoted by Barb) on Unit Executive Theory:
  “What goes around comes around.” (41:36)

• Kim on chilling effect:
  “Those protections don't help you in real time…it may stifle members of the press, particularly smaller independent outfits...It could be—have a chilling effect on the press, and that's exactly what they're trying to do.” (28:40)

• Joyce’s strategic protest advice:
  “I do think it’s important for us to be smart because doing this in this way gave the administration…a free throw…And we don’t need to be giving them free throws.” (29:40)

• Jill on DOGE data:
  “DOGE was never about stopping fraud. It was a ridiculous idea. And they have not reduced any fraud or waste in government of any significance. They cost us more than they've saved us.” (61:12)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• ICE raids and Fourth Amendment: 08:14–18:09
• Church protest, FACE Act, KKK Act, and Don Lemon: 18:14–29:40
• Lisa Cook, Federal Reserve, Supreme Court oral arguments: 36:58–48:59
• DOJ, Social Security, DOGE misuse and election concerns: 53:44–62:23
• Listener Q&A (congressional investigations, evidence suppression, Miranda): 65:21–71:58

Conclusion

In an episode brimming with legal expertise and pointed political critique, the #SistersInLaw pull back the curtain on executive overreach, the erosion of constitutional norms, and the double-edged tactics of federal law enforcement. Their legal analysis is sharp, deeply informed, and accessible to non-lawyers, urging listeners to remain vigilant, get engaged for the midterms, and understand both their rights and the real-world limitations on legal recourse. The tone, as ever, is smart, candid, and occasionally laced with exasperation at the erosion of legal safeguards.

For more: Access the resources, referenced memos, and further reading in the show notes.