Sisters In Law Episode 291: "More Big Buts"

Original Air Date: April 1, 2026
Hosts: Joyce Vance & Jill Wine-Banks

Episode Overview

This episode of #SistersInLaw’s sidebar features Joyce Vance and Jill Wine-Banks fielding legal and political questions from listeners. They clarify the structure and powers of the U.S. Constitution, judicial and presidential immunity, international law, the intricacies of major legal investigations, and the accountability of corporate actors. Throughout, the hosts maintain their signature analytical style, blending expertise with approachability and a touch of humor.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Does the Order of Constitutional Articles Indicate Importance?

[03:34 – 06:19]

• Listener Michelle asks about the order and importance of the Constitution’s Articles, especially Articles 1 (Legislature), 2 (Executive), and war powers.
• Jill Wine-Banks explains the deliberate prioritization by the Founders:
  • “They picked the legislature as the most important part of the government. The articles 1, 2 and 3 set up how our government is run…By picking the legislative... Article 1 is also the longest of the articles.” (04:26)
  • The House of Representatives was designed as the closest body to the people.
• On the power of the purse:
  • “Congress has sort of ceding that power to the executive, which isn’t where it was intended... He [the president] does not have that power. He can only spend money that has been appropriated by the Congress.” (05:00)
  • Real-world application: speculation about a president paying TSA agents via executive order instead of Congress action.

2. Judicial Immunity & Judge Aileen Cannon

[06:19 – 08:58]

• Listener Ann asks whether Judge Cannon could be held responsible/disbarred for allegedly shielding Trump-related documents.
• Joyce Vance clarifies:
  • Judges enjoy judicial immunity for actions within their judicial capacity, even if “maliciously or erroneously.”
  • “There is a but here, and it's a big one... judicial immunity does not protect judges from criminal prosecution or professional disciplinary actions.” (07:28)
  • Criminal conduct (like bribery) can bypass immunity, but no evidence of that exists in this case.

3. International Law & Presidential War Crimes

[08:58 – 10:50]

• Listener Paul (Canada) asks about the U.S.’s obligations under the UN Charter and military refusal of unlawful orders.
• Jill Wine-Banks states:
  • Attacks (e.g., bombing civilian power plants) would be “clearly violations of humanitarian law, the laws of war.”
  • The U.S. can shield itself with its Security Council veto and is not part of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
  • “So, yeah, they could have in absentia trial and say we’re guilty, but it’s not going to get us anywhere... we’re not an acceptable part of the world order, which we are not now.” (10:50)
• Memorable exchange:
  • Jill: “All of these things...are definitely violations of humanitarian law, the laws of war. So we need to do something in this country so that we are an acceptable part of the world order, which we are not now.” (10:50)

4. Handling and Integrity of the Jeffrey Epstein Files

[13:31 – 16:41]

• Listener Kobi (Pennsylvania) inquires about the location and integrity of Epstein investigation files.
• Joyce Vance details:
  • The FBI’s criminal case file is likely the most comprehensive repository.
  • Files are maintained with strict “chain of custody” and digital audit trails to detect tampering (e.g., missing document numbers).
  • Different agencies can have partial/duplicate files (e.g., Treasury, Congress).
  • “I think that that has happened in the release, a missing document when the sequential numbering is interrupted... we would find out if the documents were being monkeyed with, I believe.” (15:10)

5. Why Do Corporations Settle, While Individuals Go To Jail?

[16:41 – 19:21]

• Listener Carolyn (Los Angeles) asks why corporations pay fines, not prison, for crimes.
• Jill Wine-Banks debunks the misconception:
  • Individuals do go to jail for corporate crimes if personally responsible.
  • Lists examples: Sam Bankman-Fried (FTX), Jeffrey Skilling (Enron), Bernie Ebbers (WorldCom), Elizabeth Holmes (Theranos), Martha Stewart.
  • “Don't assume... that they can only be held civilly liable. They can be held criminally liable. And, yes, so are the individuals who commit those crimes. So there's a lot of time for jail for people who are committing crimes at the corporate level.” (18:47)

6. Can Judge Cannon’s Sealing of the Jack Smith Report Be Challenged?

[19:21 – 22:40]

• Listener Theresa (North Carolina) asks about appeals routes if Judge Cannon permanently seals Special Counsel Smith’s report.
• Joyce Vance lays out the legal avenues:
  • Citizens and press sought to intervene; Judge Cannon delayed and denied them.
  • “There will be oral argument in June in front of the 11th Circuit on that petition... If the 11th Circuit does [grant intervention], it would be the journalists, the free press, who would be challenging Donald Trump’s effort to keep Volume Two of the report perpetually secret.” (21:40)
  • “Certainly there is a real public interest in knowing the truth here.” (22:25)

Notable Quotes

• On the Constitution’s structure:
  • “Article 1 is also the longest of the articles... It was a deliberate choice to make Congress first.” — Jill Wine-Banks (04:26)
• On judicial immunity:
  • "Judicial immunity does not protect judges from criminal prosecution or professional disciplinary actions." — Joyce Vance (07:28)
• On international law and U.S. actions:
  • "Violating UN rules doesn't really get us very far, because ... we can veto any action that's taken against us." — Jill Wine-Banks (09:08)
• On individual vs. corporate criminal accountability:
  • “Don’t assume that they can only be held civilly liable...there’s a lot of time for jail for people who are committing crimes at the corporate level.” — Jill Wine-Banks (18:47)
• On press freedom and judicial process:
  • “Journalists, the free press, would be challenging Donald Trump’s effort to keep volume two of the report perpetually secret...I hope for all of our sakes that that will happen.” — Joyce Vance (21:40)

Important Timestamps

• [03:34] — Does Article order matter in the Constitution?
• [06:28] — Can judges be held accountable for controversial rulings?
• [08:58] — U.S. obligations under international law and war crimes
• [13:31] — How are the Epstein investigative files archived and protected?
• [16:41] — Corporate crime: fines vs. prison for executives
• [19:48] — Can Judge Cannon’s secrecy rulings be appealed or challenged?

Tone & Style

The conversation remains lively, inquisitive, and detailed—true to the #SistersInLaw's brand. The hosts combine academic clarity with practical examples, infusing occasional humor and encouraging listener participation ("We love audio questions!").

Recommended For

• Listeners interested in government workings, U.S. constitutional powers, judicial accountability
• Those curious about legal process, corporate crime, or current major investigations
• Anyone wanting to deepen their understanding of law and politics in an accessible, conversational setting

This summary covers all major themes and expert insights, providing a rich, clear account of the episode’s most pressing questions and answers.