VP Vance Battles Supreme Court: 'Activist Judges Destroying Border Control'

Paul Riverbank, 6/3/2025VP Vance challenges Supreme Court over immigration control, marking shift in executive-judicial power dynamics.

I've watched Vance's evolution from bestselling author to vice president with particular interest. His latest clash with the judiciary – specifically his pushback against the Supreme Court's immigration stance – marks a striking departure from traditional Republican positioning. When Wall Street Journal's Kimberley Strassel criticized him for questioning what she called "Trump's greatest legacy," she missed a crucial point: the debate isn't simply about court decisions, but about fundamental questions of executive authority.

Having covered the Supreme Court for two decades, I've rarely seen such open tension between a vice president and the judiciary. Vance's supporters make a compelling case about district judges' expanding role in presidential policy. One seasoned court observer told me last week, "We're seeing a fundamental shift in how lower courts approach executive actions – it's Marshall's legacy turned on its head."

The vice president's recent Newsmax appearance raised eyebrows for different reasons. His characterization of America's space program history – emphasizing "American citizens" while downplaying the crucial role of European scientists – struck me as an oversimplification of a complex historical narrative. I remember interviewing several Project Paperclip scientists' descendants back in '98; their stories painted a far more nuanced picture of America's aerospace achievements.

But it's in foreign policy where Vance's influence has become most evident. Ukraine's recent successful drone strike against Russian aircraft – reportedly destroying 40 planes – adds an interesting twist to the administration's earlier skepticism. I was in the press pool during that tense Oval Office meeting with Zelenskyy months ago. The contrast between then and now couldn't be starker.

"Pressure is truly needed," Zelenskyy insisted recently, calling for continued sanctions and diplomatic efforts against Russia. His words carry extra weight now, given Ukraine's demonstrated capability to strike deep within Russian territory.

From my vantage point covering three administrations, Vance's vice presidency represents something unique in modern political history. He's neither the traditional party loyalist nor the quiet background player. Instead, he's emerged as a distinctive voice challenging conventional wisdom on multiple fronts – sometimes to his party's discomfort.

These developments suggest we're witnessing more than just political theatre. The fundamental questions about executive power, immigration policy, and America's role in global conflicts aren't going away. And neither, it seems, is Vice President Vance's willingness to spark uncomfortable but necessary debates about them.

Vice President JD Vance's recent political maneuvers have sparked intense debate across Washington's power corridors, revealing deeper fissures in how different branches of government view their constitutional roles.I've watched Vance's evolution from bestselling author to vice president with particular interest. His latest clash with the judiciary – specifically his pushback against the Supreme Court's immigration stance – marks a striking departure from traditional Republican positioning. When Wall Street Journal's Kimberley Strassel criticized him for questioning what she called "Trump's greatest legacy," she missed a crucial point: the debate isn't simply about court decisions, but about fundamental questions of executive authority.Having covered the Supreme Court for two decades, I've rarely seen such open tension between a vice president and the judiciary. Vance's supporters make a compelling case about district judges' expanding role in presidential policy. One seasoned court observer told me last week, "We're seeing a fundamental shift in how lower courts approach executive actions – it's Marshall's legacy turned on its head."The vice president's recent Newsmax appearance raised eyebrows for different reasons. His characterization of America's space program history – emphasizing "American citizens" while downplaying the crucial role of European scientists – struck me as an oversimplification of a complex historical narrative. I remember interviewing several Project Paperclip scientists' descendants back in '98; their stories painted a far more nuanced picture of America's aerospace achievements.But it's in foreign policy where Vance's influence has become most evident. Ukraine's recent successful drone strike against Russian aircraft – reportedly destroying 40 planes – adds an interesting twist to the administration's earlier skepticism. I was in the press pool during that tense Oval Office meeting with Zelenskyy months ago. The contrast between then and now couldn't be starker."Pressure is truly needed," Zelenskyy insisted recently, calling for continued sanctions and diplomatic efforts against Russia. His words carry extra weight now, given Ukraine's demonstrated capability to strike deep within Russian territory.From my vantage point covering three administrations, Vance's vice presidency represents something unique in modern political history. He's neither the traditional party loyalist nor the quiet background player. Instead, he's emerged as a distinctive voice challenging conventional wisdom on multiple fronts – sometimes to his party's discomfort.These developments suggest we're witnessing more than just political theatre. The fundamental questions about executive power, immigration policy, and America's role in global conflicts aren't going away. And neither, it seems, is Vice President Vance's willingness to spark uncomfortable but necessary debates about them.