Welcome to this week's episode of Sister Sidebar with Kimberly Atkins Store and me, Bart McQuaid. If you have a question for us, please email us at sistersandlaw.com or tag us on social media using hashtag sistersandlaw. But don't just type them. We want to hear your voices, which is why we want to hear them in a voice memo using one of your notes apps, and we might play it on the show. Before we get started, we do have some news. We've got some live shows coming up in case you haven't heard. We'll be in Denver, Colorado at the Cervantes masterpiece on April 23rd, and then we head over to Atlanta, Georgia for show at the Buckhead Theater on May 3rd. Tickets are available at politicon.com slash tour, and we can't wait to see you there. Well let's get started with this week's show. First we're going to hear from a listener who has recorded a question. This comes from Eddie in New York City, New York. Kim, and this one's for you. Hello sisters in law. My name is Eddie, and I'm writing from New York City. I'm reaching out as an engaged but everyday citizen who is deeply and profoundly offended by the ongoing cover-up involving Eileen Cannon in Florida. In light of the latest reported leak surrounding Jack Smith's report, as she is attempting to permanently squash, I find it difficult to reconcile how her actions continue without meaningful intervention. And I'm trying to better understand how her blatant, partisan, and corrupt behavior is allowed to persist. I know I'm not alone in this. Could you help me clarify whether a higher court such as the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has the authority to finally step in under these circumstances, more broadly what avenues exist for concerned citizens like myself to respond constructively and hold her to account? I'm not even a resident of Florida, but I am a United States citizen, 11th generation direct descendant of the Mayflower. Please offer me some soothing advice and actionable advice. Thank you. Oh, Eddie, that is a really good question. It's a question that we get a version of a lot from people who wonder what can be done when a judge doesn't just issue rulings that one doesn't like. But as we've discussed on sisters in law many, many times, that just seemed to have no connection to the law or the facts of the case, which in my opinion, Judge Cannon has done. And what people can do is there some sort of sanction process. The answer really is no. Judges in appellate or the Supreme Court don't have the kind of jurisdiction over federal trial judges in a way that you may think of as work. You have lower employees and middle managers and top managers. It doesn't really work that way. There is something called the judicial conference, which handles basically the rules that judges have to follow more broadly, but even they are not really involved in disciplinary action. That is what the Senate confirmation process is supposed to be for, to vet these judges to make sure that they are qualified for the spot. Now whether the Senate is actually doing that job these days, that's another question. The only way to discipline a judge for what they do on the bench would be the impeachment process. That is what is there. Now, if they do something egregious, could they maybe face discipline from their state bar licensing board perhaps? But otherwise, in terms of what citizens can do, you can let your members of Congress and the Senate know that you don't think that this job should still be with that judge and perhaps they will act, but that's really the only game in town. Our next question is from Antonio in Santa Monica, California, near where my stepdaughter lives. It's lovely over there who asks, are courtroom artists paid? Why then did that tradition, why and when did that tradition begin with courtroom sketch artists bar? I love this question. It's so interesting. I have seen courtroom sketch artists, but again, this one caused me to go back and do a little bit of research. According to the research, they began as early as the Salem witch trials. There have always been people in courts who, in more recent years, in federal court, cameras are banned from the courtroom. If you want to see an image of what this looked like, although now we've got AI generating some of these things, you couldn't have cameras. If you want to see what's looking like in the courtroom, sketch art artistry is really the only way to capture what's happening in the courtroom. It became popular in the United States during the trial of the kidnapping and killing of the Lindbergh baby in 1935 because there was such public interest in it. It was in the newspapers every day, and people wanted to see what the defendant looked like in that case, what the parties looked like, what the room looked like in that case. That tradition continues to this day. You'll see sketches on television and in newspapers that are drawn by these sketch artists, and they're fascinating. I love to sit next to them when they were sketching, and I was watching something in the courtroom because I would see how they would work. When somebody was at the podium, they might sketch out their profile, and then people are moving, so they aren't able to finish their sketch. They might have three or four in progress as they're going, and then as somebody else stands up, they might quickly flip back to that first one and finish the sketch of the defense attorney or start working on their sketch of the judge. I've always found that art very fascinating. Typically, UST, who pays them, they are often freelancers, and they will sell their sketches to newspapers or television, especially in the local market. There's often very keen interest in local television of having a shot to be able to show in addition to the reporter standing outside the courtroom. The last thing I'll say is they sell these things for quite a lot of money. Oftentimes, lawyers want them. They'll say, oh, I was in the sketch. People will buy them for friends, and you'll see lawyers will have them framed in their offices, but they're really expensive. I got $1,000 a war for a sketch, so I never wanted one of these sketches because I just didn't want to pay for it, so too cheap. But I did have a friend who found a workaround. I'm not sure if this is any sort of copyright violation, but he had his sketch done when he was advocating, and it got printed in the local newspaper, which was then on the online site for the newspaper. So he printed it out and blew it up and framed it in his office. So long as he stays in his house and he's not like shelling it out. That's right. I think he's okay. So speaking of that, actually a funny anecdote. One of the early gifts that Greg got me in our relationship was it was one argument. I can't remember what argument it was. I think it was some employment, Title VII argument that went away that I didn't like, but we were both covering the argument, and the Supreme Court sketch artist named Bill Hennessey was sitting behind us. You could see, and I remember the whole time I was twisting my hair because when I think, and my hair is not braided, one of the things when I'm thinking is my tic, is that I twist my hair, and it's me sitting there with my hair twisted around my finger. And then right in front of me to the side is Greg. You can see the back, I like Greg right there. It's like a sketch of the two of us inside the Supreme Court while Pam Carlin is arguing. Oh, I love it. And this was a while ago, so it has like Ginsburg's in it with like her little glasses. Yeah. And you know, like, yeah, look at all gruff. And then you bought that and gave that to me for a gift. So that's a wonderful gift. Very good. I have a friend who also has one that was hanging in her office, I suppose it still is, in a case where she was arguing a civil rights case where people who used comfort animals, therapy pets in their work, and they were discriminated against. And so the picture of the, is of my friend conducting a witness examination where the witness is on the stand with the dog, which is really great there in the sketch too. Great one. Yeah, there's a lot of good ones. This comes to us from Kelly in San Antonio, Texas, who says, a study found that 60% of judges who responded reported using at least one AI tool in their judicial work. Do you think this will lead to fewer law clerk positions and a smaller number of available legal careers? This is a great question. Okay, first of all, I just have to say it creeps me out that judges are using AI. Like I try so hard not to impart because I fear for my job. I'm like, no, my words and my are important and I'm going to protect them and use them. It's better than any robot. So that's alarming. But I will say this though, I think the answer to that question is no, I don't think that clerk's jobs are going to be in danger for this reason. A clerk isn't just an employee. It's not just somebody filling a space and doing a job. This is a prestigious spot to get for a law grad to be chosen as a clerk in a court is a coveted competitive post. And I don't think those are going to go the way, by the wayside, just because judges are using AI. I think judges enjoy, the judges that I know enjoy listening to their clerks who have different views on things and discussing that when they're putting an opinion together. And also a clerkship is something that if a judge sees something in a student, an applicant, they know that this is something that's going to help them in their career and they're going to want to ensure that they can play a role in getting certain people. I mean, there are certain judges that pride themselves in ensuring that they have just as many women as men, for example, or getting some clerks who come from non-IV League schools in different backgrounds, different geographies, just to ensure there is a... It's their way to have a little bit of a hand in how the legal pipeline is being filled. And I think judges really appreciate that role. So I don't think they're going to use AI to supplant that. Yeah. I tell my law students, I don't think your jobs are going to be replaced. But I do think they may change. And I think just like one way it's going to change, the expectations are going to be that you do your work faster. Which is... Yes. You'd be like, oh, how did you handle those days back when there was a typewriter and you didn't have... You actually have to take down a book and look up what's going on. And you know what? I didn't write three briefs a week. I wrote one brief a week. And so I think the expectation will just be that you can do this work, but you just do it faster. I think you're right. I think you're right. Guys, if you ask me if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask you if I ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask ask everyone. But we recommend the Ultimate Sampler Pack. It's a great way to try all of IQ bars, products and flavors, complete with nine IQ bars, eight IQ mix sticks, and four IQ Joe sticks. You know, I've been making an effort to be really careful about what I put in my body. And that's one thing that I'm really, really happy about IQ bar because unlike a lot of stuff out there, you don't have to worry about what you're getting. All IQ bar products are clean label certified and entirely free from gluten, dairy, soy, GMOs and artificial ingredients. So you know that you're treating yourself to the best. Plus all IQ bar products are packed with clean, delicious ingredients that keep you physically and mentally fit like magnesium, lion's mane and more. Ooh, lion's mane. Is that going to make me roar? Between teaching, podcasting and keeping up with the news, it can be hard to find time to get the nutrition and energy we need to beat the clock. That's why I'm so glad we discovered IQ bar and their awesome products. Their chocolate sea salt plant protein bars are so convenient to carry around in your bag. And when I'm in a rush, the original black IQ Joe is a powerful burst of delicious caffeinated mushroom coffee with everything from mint chocolate chip protein bars to blueberry pomegranate hydration mixes, vanilla spice coffee and more. There's so much variety. The only problem is deciding which flavor I want that day. So the ultimate sampler pack is a must. You need to try it for yourself. With over 20,000 five star reviews and counting, more people than ever are fueling their busy lifestyles with IQ bars, brain and body boosting bars, hydration mixes and mushroom coffee. And their ultimate sampler pack includes all three. And right now IQ bar is offering our special podcast listeners 20% off all IQ bar products, including the ultimate sampler pack plus free shipping. So to get your 20% off text sisters to 64,000. Again, text sisters to 64,000 6400. That's sisters to 64,000. Message and data rates may apply. See terms for details. And the link is in our show notes. The news is more stressful than ever. And I think all of us want to escape to a relaxing tropical beach far away from the craziness. But even if you're not there, I have the next best thing with Osea Malibu. I feel like I'm in paradise when I incorporate them into my regimen. Right now I'm really enjoying their dream collection. It's an amazing combo for unwinding and resetting for the day ahead. And it's the perfect way to give our skin a fresh start in spring. You need to try it. So just to fill you in Osea's dream night serum and dream night cream are clinically tested formulas powered by bio retinol and designed to reduce the visible effects of stress on your skin while you sleep. I like putting on their dream bio retinol body serum first. And I was so excited to try it out. It's brand new. And it's a full body restorative treatment that visibly distresses the skin with a holistic blend of bio retinol red seaweed, magnesium and lavender. Actually, I like the lavender smell so much that I've been using it in the daytime. I know that's breaking the rules, but I use it not just at night. So, you know, you could break the rules with Osea. It's okay. And then, you know, there's also the night cream, which I also use during the day. I just, I love the smell so much. Both products are so nurturing. And now I have firmer, more moisturized skin all day long that glows whenever I apply it. It doesn't just visibly firm and improve skin elasticity. It also smooths fine lines and wrinkles with less irritation than the traditional retinol of other brands. Yeah. You know, there's nobody who gets to make the rules, Kim, you do you. If you want to use these things during the day, I think it's all just fine. Skincare is self care and the dream collection makes it easy to give your skin a rest. Say goodnight to dryness, dullness, wrinkles and lack of firmness because we know Osea makes you supple. And say hello to serenity. It's the perfect relaxing ritual and works overnight. In the morning, your skin is softer, smoother and more radiant. Both of its products are truly an essential treatment in any bedtime routine. They're so efficient and lead to a real transformation in your body and well being. There really is nothing better for promoting a restful night while visibly firming and improving skin elasticity. And we love that everything is vegan, cruelty free and comes in sustainable packaging. So don't wait. Give your skin a rest with clean clinically tested skincare from Osea. And right now we have a special discount for our listeners. Get 10% off your first order site wide with code sisters10 at OseaMalibu.com. That's OseaMalibu.com, code sisters10. And the link is in our show notes. Our next question comes from Sandy in Elk Grove, California, who left us this voice message. Hi sisters, this is Sandy from Elk Grove, California. I'm wondering if there are any federal regulations or statutes regarding what can and cannot appear on U.S. currency. With Trump's decision to place his name on currency, I'm wondering if the reverse sides of our currency will now be filled with pictures of Mar-a-Lago or other Trump properties? Well, Sandy, that is certainly an interesting question. And I had to do a little research on the answer to this question because I did not know. There are a couple of laws in the United States that do restrict what can appear on U.S. currency. So there's one called the Thayer Amendment, which is an 1866 law that prohibits the image of any living person on bond securities, notes, or currency of the United States. And so you can't have a living person, no matter who they are, on legal currency. There's also a 2005 law that talks about coins. It was at the time when a series of $1 coins honoring American presidents were issued and the law explicitly stated that a living president could not be on the coin and it couldn't even be a former or deceased president unless they had been dead for two years. And I suppose that's to give you enough time to make sure they have not committed any scandals that made them unworthy of appearing on a coin. Good thing, you know, we've got a president without any scandals who's now talking about putting his image on a coin. There is, however, these apply to legal tender. And so what they're talking about with President Trump is to put his scowling face and image of him leaning on a desk on a commemorative coin. And so these rules do not apply to commemorative coins. I also did not find any rule prohibiting the president from putting his signature on legal tender, which of course, President Trump is seeking to do. So if he can't have his image on it, he's going to have his huge black sharpie scrawl appearing on legal tender. You know, I was on vacation when that headline dropped and I woke up and looked at it and I wondered if I was still dreaming, like if I was just dreaming. It is the kind of thing you dream about, right? Like, did that really happen or is that just weird? It's like, wait, he's doing what now? Oh my goodness. All right. Well, so our next question comes from Kylie Barb. And Kylie asks, what determines which category a felony or misdemeanor fall in and who decides it? Oh, that's such a great question. I think, you know, felonies typically are crimes punishable by more than a year in prison. And misdemeanors are typically lesser crimes that are punishable by a year or less. Or sometimes there's a dollar amount. If it's, you know, stealing money or fines, it might be tied to a dollar amount. Like a felony might be stealing more than a thousand dollars and a misdemeanor might be less than that. But it's the legislature who decides. So we have something in this country called the legality principle that says that crimes must be previously set by statute, which are written by the legislature before a person can be charged with it. That's to give them fair notice that this is a crime on the books and so that we can conform our behavior in compliance with the law. But every statute that criminalizes certain behavior will include in there the maximum punishment. And so they will say punishable by up to a year in prison or punishable by 10 years or 20 years. They will also typically describe what is a felony and what is a misdemeanor. For example, in Michigan, we have something called high misdemeanors that are punishable by up to two years in prison. I learned about that when I was charging people with being a felon in possession of a firearm. Frequently, police officers or federal agents would come and say, hey, I've got somebody who is a felon. They committed this certain crime and they spent two years in prison. And I'll look at it and say, that was actually a misdemeanor. It was a high misdemeanor, but it wasn't classified as a felony. So it's the legislature who decides all of those things. All right, Kim, I got one for you. Here's one that's kind of interesting. You're kind of a Supreme Court conlaw geek. So here's one from Leslie who says, why were there no term limits in the Constitution? Can it be done without an amendment? That is a great question, Leslie. And I don't know why I'm unable to ask the framers why they did not want term limits in specifically mentioned in the Constitution. I do know that from the debates around Article 3, that there was a sense that by having the only means to remove a judge, a federal judge being either retirement, resignation, or impeachment, that means they are not subject to the whims of the public opinion and that they can base their decision not on what the public thinks, but what their true views of what the law or the Constitution is, basically so that they can do their job without influence. Well, fast forward to 2026, we see that that's not working out exactly the way that they intended if that was the intent. So that brings us to the next part of your question. Will it take an amendment to the Constitution to change that? I don't think so. I think that I know for a fact that some very smart people have been putting their heads together about how to strengthen our democracy. And one idea is to basically borrow something from federal trial and appellate level judges who have something called senior status. They can reach a point that they want to retire but not retire completely and they can take something called senior status. So they're not doing the everyday judging of cases, although they can be recalled if needed to sit on a court and perform. But because they are still judges and they can still draw their salary or pension, that way that still keeps with the constitutional requirement that they cannot be removed by any other means in their resignation or impeachment. And that is believed to still be constitutional, just to pass a law saying, okay, you guys only get 18 years on the bench, would likely be struck down as constitutional because it doesn't comport with the language of the Constitution. But if you can put senior status in and allow judges to rotate off, they'll still be considered justices, but they just wouldn't be acting in an active way. I think that that is something that Congress can pass on its own. There's still debate, but there are a lot of smart people who agree with that. And I think that that's one way to do it. Well, thank you for listening to Sisters Sidebar with Barb McQuaid and me, Kim, at KinStore. Keep sending us those questions. The questions this week are so good and they always are. You can send them, you can email a voice memo to sistersinlaw.com or you can email your questions there or you can use the hashtag like we've always been doing, like the name of our show, hashtag sisters in law on your social media and send them there. And don't forget, we are coming to Denver, Colorado on April 23rd at the Cervantes Masterpiece and we're going to be in Atlanta on May 3rd at the Buckhead Theater. You can get those tickets at politicon.com slash tour and we cannot wait to see you there. And don't forget to support our this week's sponsors, iCubar and Osea. They are the reason that we can bring this show to you and we would love it if you support them. And don't forget to get your merch for Sisters in Law. You can wear it to the show or you can wear it as you're listening to the podcast. You can go to politicon.com slash merch and get stuff like this cool nifty hoodie and show your pride in our show. We would really appreciate that too. And see you next week and every week on Wednesdays with Sister Sidebars and on Saturdays with a new episode of hashtag sisters in law. And see you next week on...blah blah blah blah...pumpernickel. Sorry, I was trying to do so good and look in the camera. He came so close. Oh my god. Okay. And see you next week and every week on Wednesdays with Sister Sidebars and on Saturdays with a new episode of hashtag sisters in law.
