Editorial illustration
Vice President JD Vance isn’t afraid to call it like he sees it, even when it means criticizing a Supreme Court justice appointed by President Trump. When asked about Amy Coney Barrett’s decision to side with the liberal justices in striking down Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship, Vance didn’t mince words. Do I think she made a mistake in the ruling? I do.
The Supreme Court handed down a narrow 5-4 decision on Tuesday, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing the majority opinion. Roberts was joined by Barrett, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson in ruling that children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. The decision effectively blocks the Trump administration from ending automatic citizenship for babies born to illegal aliens.
Vance’s critique cuts to the heart of what conservatives have been arguing for years. I don’t know how anybody can say that if a person who is an illegal alien or a person, for example, who’s pregnant and comes to the United States on a vacation, they have a baby and all of a sudden their entire family gets the benefits of American citizenship? He’s right. The idea that a tourist on a two-week vacation can secure lifetime citizenship for their child with a well-timed delivery makes a mockery of what citizenship is supposed to mean.
The Vice President made clear he doesn’t believe this is what the framers of the 14th Amendment had in mind, and he’s not alone in that interpretation. Conservative justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito both dissented, with Thomas writing that the Reconstruction Amendments were specifically designed to ensure that children of black slaves would be given citizenship. As Thomas noted, blacks were entitled to citizenship because they were Americans. They had no other homeland, owed no allegiance to any foreign power, and were subject to no other authority. The same cannot be said for foreign nationals who happen to give birth on American soil.
Vance struck a measured tone despite his disagreement. It was 5-4. Sometimes the Supreme Court makes mistakes. We’re going to try to correct that mistake, but nobody’s perfect, including the Supreme Court. This is the kind of principled conservatism that separates the MAGA movement from the cult of personality its critics claim it to be. Vance isn’t attacking Barrett personally. He’s disagreeing with her legal reasoning and promising to keep fighting for what he believes is the correct interpretation of the Constitution.
The ruling itself highlights the limitations of executive action when it comes to fundamental constitutional questions. President Trump tried to work within his authority to end a practice that has been exploited for decades, but the Supreme Court has spoken. The administration now faces a choice: accept the ruling as the final word, or pursue other avenues including legislative solutions or a constitutional amendment.
What makes this moment significant is the willingness of administration officials to publicly disagree with the Court while respecting its authority. Vance isn’t calling for Barrett’s impeachment or demanding the administration ignore the ruling. He’s stating his belief that she got it wrong and promising to continue the fight through proper channels. This is how constitutional governance is supposed to work.
The birthright citizenship debate isn’t going away. With millions of illegal aliens in the country and birth tourism operations running sophisticated schemes to exploit this loophole, the pressure for reform will only grow. Tuesday’s ruling was a setback, but Vance’s comments make clear the administration isn’t giving up. They’ll look for other ways to address what they see as a fundamental abuse of American immigration law.
Justice Barrett may have sided with the liberals this time, but conservatives who supported her nomination shouldn’t despair over one disagreement. Even Ronald Reagan’s appointees occasionally disappointed him. What matters is the overall direction of the Court and the willingness of conservative leaders like Vance to speak honestly when they believe mistakes have been made. The Constitution is worth fighting for, even when the fight is against friendly faces.
About The Author
