JD Vance defends ‘indentured servants’ remark on H-1B workers, says ‘I love my Indian in-laws’

Washigton DC: US Vice-President JD Vance has sought to clarify his controversial remarks about foreign professionals working in the United States on H-1B visas, saying he loves his Indian in-laws while defending his argument that American companies should prioritise eligible domestic workers when suitable candidates are available.

Vance had earlier urged US companies to stop hiring foreign workers for jobs that Americans could perform, describing them as “indentured servants”. His comments came amid the Trump administration's reported suspension of several companies from the Permanent Labour Certification (PERM) programme, a key step in the employment-based green card process.

Addressing the criticism, Vance acknowledged that his “rhetoric may have been imperfect” but maintained that the US immigration system needed to balance welcoming foreign professionals with protecting American workers.

Vance invokes his Indian in-laws

Responding to questions about his earlier comments, Vance referred to his wife, Usha Vance, whose parents immigrated to the United States from South India.

“You know where my family comes from, and I love my mother-in-law and father-in-law who immigrated from South India,” Vance said, adding that he was proud of his wife, who was born in the United States.

However, he maintained that the issue was not about rejecting foreign workers but about preventing companies from using overseas recruitment to replace existing American employees.

Vance illustrated his argument with the example of a large corporation hiring a foreign accountant while dismissing an American accountant already on its payroll, despite the availability of suitable domestic candidates. He described such a practice as unfair.

He argued that employment and immigration policies should protect both American workers and foreign professionals from exploitative practices.

Indian IT companies affected by PERM suspension

Earlier this month, the Trump administration announced the suspension of several companies from the PERM programme, according to the reports provided.

The companies named included Microsoft, Cognizant, Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), Wipro, HCL and Capgemini.

PERM labour certification is generally part of the process through which eligible employers seek employment-based permanent residency for foreign workers. It involves demonstrating that the relevant labour-market requirements have been met.

The reported suspension affects a process used by employers seeking to sponsor foreign professionals for green cards. It is distinct from a blanket cancellation of H-1B visas or an automatic termination of the employment of workers already in the United States.

India calls Vance's remarks offensive

India had criticised Vance's description of foreign professionals as “indentured servants”, calling the remarks “unwarranted and deeply offensive”.

The Ministry of External Affairs said the comments overlooked the contributions of Indian professionals to the US economy and its innovation sector.

The ministry said Indian professionals in the United States were highly educated and skilled contributors. New Delhi also raised concerns about the reported restrictions on green card filings by major Indian IT companies, arguing that they conflicted with the shared ambitions of India and the United States.

The exchange comes as immigration, employment protections and access to permanent residency remain contentious issues in US policy.

What the H-1B and PERM debate means for Indian workers

The H-1B visa allows US employers to hire eligible foreign professionals for specialised occupations, subject to immigration rules and applicable limits. Indian nationals account for a substantial share of H-1B beneficiaries, particularly in technology and related sectors.

The PERM process serves a different purpose. It is generally the first stage of many employer-sponsored employment-based green card applications, requiring employers to complete labour-market certification procedures. A suspension affecting PERM filings can therefore create uncertainty for workers pursuing permanent residency, even if their existing temporary work authorisation is not directly cancelled.

Vance's argument centres on whether employers should be allowed to recruit foreign professionals when suitable American workers are available. Critics of restrictive immigration measures argue that skilled migrants contribute to innovation, business growth and the US technology sector.

The dispute also has implications for India-US relations. Indian IT firms and professionals are closely connected to the US technology market, making changes to work visas and green card procedures important to employers, employees and bilateral economic ties.

Vance's reference to his Indian in-laws addresses the personal dimension of the controversy, but his broader position remains focused on employment and immigration policy. His acknowledgement that his wording may have been imperfect does not amount to a withdrawal of his argument for prioritising American workers.