Podcast Summary: #SistersInLaw – Episode 273

Title: Sisters Sidebar: Congress, You Up?
Date: January 28, 2026
Hosts: Barb McQuaid & Kimberly Atkins Stohr
Podcast: Politicon’s #SistersInLaw

Episode Overview

This is the inaugural episode of “Sisters Sidebar,” a new midweek extension of #SistersInLaw, designed to answer listener-submitted legal and political questions. Hosts Barb McQuaid and Kimberly Atkins Stohr field a diverse selection of inquiries—ranging from the legality of ICE protests and state prosecutions of federal officers to ethical concerns regarding U.S. attorneys and reflections on their own legal careers. The tone is conversational, witty, and deeply informative, providing practical wisdom and behind-the-scenes insight into law, ethics, and civic action.

Key Discussion Points

1. Welcome and Listener Engagement (00:03–02:13)

• Barb and Kim explain the purpose of the new “Sidebar” series: an interactive Q&A digest addressing the most pressing and interesting listener questions.
• Listeners are encouraged to submit succinct legal questions via email or social media and to send in voice memos (iPhone instructions provided).
  • Quote:
    “We don't want to hear your long-winded stories... This is about legal questions. So that's what we wanna hear about.” — Barb McQuaid (01:25)

2. The Legality of Protesting ICE and Alerting Neighbors (02:13–04:47)

• Listener Question: Is it illegal to honk horns or blow whistles to warn neighbors of ICE presence?

• Kim’s Response:

  • First Amendment protections are broad; actions like blowing whistles or yelling warnings are generally protected—provided you don’t physically interfere with ICE operations.
  • Filming ICE on public property is also permitted.
  • Cautions about possible local noise ordinances and stresses that First Amendment rights work as defenses after the fact—not as preventative shields in real time.
    • Quote:
      “The First Amendment will serve as a defense if you are charged with a crime ... but just be mindful, let people know if you're protesting, go there with other people. Just do common sense stuff to keep yourself safe.” — Kimberly Atkins Stohr (03:30)

• Barb’s Addendum:

  • Notes reports of poorly trained ICE agents confronting protesters; stresses winning legal challenges might come later, so maintaining distance is wise for safety.
    • Quote:
      “You'll probably win in the end, but... save yourself a little aggravation and just keep your distance.” — Barb McQuaid (04:13)

3. State Criminal Prosecutions of Federal Officers (04:47–07:03)

• Listener Question: How does removal from state court to federal court work for federal officers prosecuted under state law?

  • Kim: Recognizes legal expertise of the questioner.

• Barb’s Breakdown:

  • Federal officers (e.g., ICE agents) charged by state prosecutors can have cases “removed” to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1442.
  • Even if tried in federal court, state law applies and state prosecutors handle the prosecution—often as temporary federal prosecutors.
  • Qualified immunity exists but isn’t absolute; agents must show they acted within official scope and necessity.
    • Quote:
      “State law being applied in federal court... They would have to show that they were acting within the scope of their duties... and that what they did was necessary and proper.” — Barb McQuaid (05:20, 06:10)

• Kim’s Clarification:

  • DOJ doesn’t control the case after it's moved to federal court; only the venue changes.
    • Quote:
      “Just because it’s in federal court doesn’t mean it’s under DOJ control… It’s still a state case. The only thing that changes is the venue.” — Kimberly Atkins Stohr (06:38)

4. Disbarment and Attorney Discipline: The Case of Lindsey Halligan (07:03–08:58)

• Listener Question: Is there any recourse to disbar Lindsey Halligan after controversial actions and disqualification by a federal judge?
• Kim’s Response:

  • Any attorney can face disciplinary action, including disbarment, for unethical conduct.

  • Disbarment is rare and reserved for egregious misdeeds, though current complaints against Halligan are serious due to her handling of certain criminal charges.

    • Quote:
      “Disbarment is incredibly rare. Like, the only... one person who has been disbarred—and that's because he stole his client's money.” — Kimberly Atkins Stohr (08:18)

  • Judges’ strong rebuke (“girl, bye”) may add weight to complaints against Halligan.

    • Quote:
      “They basically came and, like, took off her name off the door while she was still sitting in the office to kick her out.” — Kimberly Atkins Stohr (08:45)

5. Ethics of U.S. Attorney Attendance at Political Events (10:08–12:14)

• Listener Question: Is it standard practice for a U.S. Attorney (Ms. Pirro) to attend political events at Mar-a-Lago?

• Barb’s Response:

  • Strongly condemns such appearances due to the imperative for prosecutorial independence and public trust.

  • Notes possible violation of the Hatch Act, which prohibits political activity for federal officials.

    • Quote:
      “A U.S. attorney is supposed to act without fear or favor, to be independent from partisan politics… I think that is probably a violation of the Hatch Act.” — Barb McQuaid (10:43)

  • Warns this undermines public trust and can lead to motions for disqualification.

    • Quote:
      “When people see a US Attorney palling around with the president, I think it makes it very difficult to believe that they are acting impartially.” — Barb McQuaid (11:05)

• Kim’s Follow-up:

  • Expresses concern about legal motions and fair trials arising from such conflicts.
    • Quote:
      “I would also worry a lot that you would get all these motions for disqualification in a lot of these cases that she's bringing, right?” — Kimberly Atkins Stohr (12:07)

6. Can Congress Members Be Sued for Not Checking the Executive Branch? (12:14–14:01)

• Listener Question: Can individuals sue members of Congress for failing to check executive abuse?
• Kim’s Response:
  • No; Congressional actions are shielded by broad privilege (Speech or Debate Clause); accountability comes through elections.
    • Quote:
      “Members of Congress are protected by a privilege... They cannot be sued for it. But there’s this thing called elections.” — Kimberly Atkins Stohr (13:22)

7. Personal Reflections: Why Law? (14:01–15:35)

• Listener Question: When did you realize you wanted a legal career, and did you follow that path?

• Barb’s Story:

  • Inspired by Watergate hearings; initial dreams included journalism and law, driven by desire to hold the powerful accountable.
    • Quote:
      “I was so deeply offended that the President of the United States had done something wrong. And I very much wanted to be part of a system that held powerful people... accountable for abusing their trust of the people.” — Barb McQuaid (14:17)

• Kim’s Story:

  • Wanted to be a lawyer early on, influenced by “LA Law,” but shifted to journalism after practical courtroom experience, finding journalism a better fit.

    • Quote:
      “I wanted to be a lawyer like on LA Law... And I learned very quickly that this was not what I wanted to do. And I switched to journalism, which has really served me well...” — Kimberly Atkins Stohr (14:53)

  • Fun moment realizing their career paths crisscrossed—Barb wanted to be a journalist then lawyer; Kim vice versa.

8. Listener Reminders and Lighthearted Wrap-Up (15:35–16:49)

• Encourage submission of concise, voiced questions; playful banter about technological struggles with co-host Jill Wine-Banks’ iPhone.
  • Quote:
    “I nominate you to teach her how to do it.” — Barb McQuaid (16:42)

Memorable Moments & Quotes

• On protecting yourself during ICE protests:
  “The First Amendment isn’t going to protect you in real time... do so in a way that is smart so that you protect yourself and you can continue to use your voice.” — Kim (03:22)
• On the ethics of U.S. Attorneys:
  “A U.S. attorney is supposed to act without fear or favor, to be independent from partisan politics...” — Barb (10:43)
• On the primacy of voter accountability:
  “They work at the privilege of voters. So that’s the way it works, not through lawsuits.” — Kim (13:35)
• Career reflections:
  “My first aspiration was to be a journalist and later a lawyer... It really came from Watergate.” — Barb (14:17)
  “Barb, you wanted to be a journalist and then you became a lawyer, and I wanted to be a lawyer and then I became a journalist.” — Kim (14:47)

Key Timestamps for Important Segments

• Purpose of Sidebar & Submission Details: 00:03–02:13
• ICE Protest Laws Discussion: 02:13–04:47
• Federal Officers in State Court: 04:47–07:03
• Lindsey Halligan/Disbarment: 07:03–08:58
• U.S. Attorney at Political Event Ethics: 10:08–12:14
• Suing Congress Members: 12:14–14:01
• Career Inspirations: 14:01–15:35

Tone and Take-Home Message

The episode exemplifies the #SistersInLaw blend of sharp legal acumen, real-world pragmatism, and relatable, candid conversation. Through listener engagement and expert answers, Barb and Kim not only demystify complex legal issues but connect them vividly to civic life—a public service delivered with wit and warmth.