US Vice President JD Vance has issued a blunt and forceful response to far-right political commentator Nick Fuentes following a livestream in which Fuentes made offensive and racially charged remarks about Vance’s wife, Usha Vance. Fuentes targeted her Indian American and Hindu background and labelled the Vice President a “race traitor” for marrying a woman of Indian origin.
Speaking to the online publication UnHerd at his official residence in Washington, DC, Vance reacted sharply when Fuentes’ name was brought up. Making his position unmistakably clear, he said that any individual who attacks his wife, regardless of political affiliation or public standing, would face his full condemnation. He underscored that such attacks were unacceptable and drew a clear personal boundary, describing this stance as his unequivocal position as Vice President.
Fuentes, who has been described as a white supremacist by civil rights watchdogs, had used derogatory language during his livestream, mocking Vance for marrying an Indian-origin woman and criticising the couple for giving their son an Indian name. His comments included slurs and personal insults directed at both JD Vance and his family, sparking widespread outrage.
Vance’s remarks were not limited to Fuentes alone. He also addressed comments previously made by former White House press secretary Jen Psaki. In October, Psaki had joked on a podcast that Usha Vance should be “rescued” from her husband, suggesting—sarcastically—that she might be distressed or unhappy in her marriage. Vance grouped such remarks with Fuentes’ attacks, arguing that they crossed a line by targeting his wife rather than engaging in substantive political debate.
Usha Vance, who married JD Vance in 2014, is a highly accomplished former lawyer. She previously clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts and for Brett Kavanaugh during his tenure as a federal appeals court judge, before he was elevated to the US Supreme Court. The couple have three children and have often spoken publicly about their family life, faith, and shared values.
By responding so directly, Vance sought to draw attention to what he described as a broader pattern of personal and racial attacks in political discourse. He made it clear that while he is open to political criticism, he considers attacks on his family—particularly those rooted in race or religion—to be beyond the pale.
