Vice President JD Vance has ignited a fierce national debate after suggesting that the United States may need to reconsider its traditional enforcement of due process in the context of mass deportations, citing what he calls an “overwhelming” influx of illegal immigrants under President Joe Biden’s administration. Vance’s remarks, delivered in a lengthy social media post, have drawn sharp responses from legal experts, lawmakers, and advocacy groups, raising fundamental questions about constitutional rights, the integrity of the legal system, and the future of American immigration policy.

Vance’s Argument: “Fake Legal Process” and Mass Deportation

Vance, closely aligned with President Donald Trump, has framed the current immigration situation as a national emergency, blaming Biden for allowing “approximately 20 million illegal aliens” into the country—a figure that independent fact-checkers have found to be significantly inflated, with most credible estimates placing the number closer to 11–12 million. According to Vance, the sheer volume of undocumented migrants has stretched the legal system’s capacity to its limits, making it “impractical” to afford every individual a full measure of due process, such as jury trials, before deportation.

He further argued that calls for robust legal protections in deportation proceedings amount to “fake legal process”—a tactic, he claimed, designed to prevent enforcement and normalize mass illegal immigration. “They want to accomplish through fake legal process what they failed to accomplish politically: the ratification of Biden’s illegal migrant invasion,” Vance wrote, vowing that he and Trump “will not stand for it”.

Vance challenged critics to propose realistic alternatives that would allow the government to deport “at least a few million people per year,” suggesting that without such solutions, opponents of his approach “don’t want border security”.

Legal and Constitutional Backlash

Vance’s remarks have sparked immediate and robust pushback from legal scholars, members of Congress, and civil rights groups. Critics warn that undermining due process in immigration enforcement would not only violate the Fifth Amendment—which guarantees that no person, not just citizens, shall be deprived of “life, liberty, or property without due process of law”—but also set a dangerous precedent for the erosion of fundamental rights.

Legal experts emphasize that deportation, while a civil rather than criminal proceeding, still carries life-altering consequences and thus requires procedural safeguards. Supreme Court decisions such as Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) and INS v. St. Cyr (2001) have affirmed that non-citizens are entitled to meaningful judicial review and protection against indefinite detention or summary removal.

“McCarthy’s warning that immigration enforcement must ‘comply with due process’ reflects this established jurisprudence,” one legal analyst noted, arguing that Vance’s framing “reduces justice to a transactional exercise of state power, where efficiency and political satisfaction trump procedural integrity”.

Political and Social Implications

Vance’s rhetoric is emblematic of a broader shift in the Republican Party’s approach to immigration, prioritizing rapid enforcement and mass deportation over individualized assessment and legal protections. His stance has found support among hardline immigration hawks but has alarmed moderates and progressives, who see it as an attack on the rule of law and America’s moral standing.

The debate has also exposed deep divisions over the role of the judiciary in checking executive power. Vance’s critics argue that bypassing due process would move the country toward authoritarian governance, where rights are contingent on political will rather than constitutional principle.

Fact-Checking the Numbers

Vance’s claim of 20 million or more undocumented immigrants has been widely disputed. Fact-checkers from outlets such as ABC News and the BBC have pointed to Department of Homeland Security and Pew Research Center estimates that put the number closer to 11 million. Critics accuse Vance of inflating figures to justify extreme policy measures.

The Road Ahead

As the 2024 election cycle intensifies, immigration remains a flashpoint issue. Vance’s comments have galvanized both supporters and opponents, ensuring that the debate over due process, constitutional rights, and the limits of executive power will remain at the forefront of national discourse.

Whether Congress or the courts will act to clarify or constrain the administration’s authority in this arena remains to be seen. For now, the country is left grappling with the fundamental question: Can America secure its borders without sacrificing the legal principles that define its democracy?