The influence of Catholic figures within Trump's administration can be felt both in terms of policy aligning with Catholic social doctrine and the open expression of the faith by key appointees.
Apart from his V.P., Trump has selected—at least nominal—Catholics for high positions, including Marco Rubio, R.F. Kennedy Jr., and presumably Elise Stefanik and John Ratcliffe. As a result, Catholics are more represented in Trump’s cabinet than in that of Joe Biden’s outgoing administration, albeit not markedly so.
More significantly, Trump’s policy proposals are moderately more aligned with Catholic Social Teaching than his predecessor’s—a fact borne out by his record during his first term, the clearest example being him facilitating the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe vs. Wade, which earned Trump the endorsement of prominent Catholic organizations.
We may also point to Trump’s support for policies that make it easier for parents to select schooling for their children beyond public schools based on families’ geography. He has advocated for the redirection of public funds so that parents are free to send their children to schools of their choice, including private and religious institutions. This can be seen as an expression of the principles of subsidiarity and family cohesion, central tenets of Catholic Social Doctrine and, more generally, a way for conservative and religious parents to access curricula aligned with their values.
Trump also pushed for the expansion of voucher programs and federal funding for Education Savings Accounts (ESAs). Such accounts would enable families to access public money meant for educational expenses such as tuition, alternative schooling, or homeschooling. Tax credit scholarships were another instrument much-favoured by Trump. This mechanism, which offsets donations to scholarship funds with tax credits, sought to bolster private school access without direct government expenditure. Such schemes were emblematic of his administration’s broader commitment to innovative financing solutions for education reform.
Legislatively, Trump signalled his readiness to back school choice bills at the federal level, including measures from congressional committees. He frequently framed the issue in moral terms, declaring it the “civil rights issue” of the present era, in that no child should be restricted to attend underperforming public schools solely because of their zip code (though past presidents have used similar language). In this vein, Trump’s stance on religious liberty, particularly in defending the rights of religious institutions against government overreach, aligns with concerns over freedom of worship.
For his part, during his 2021 Senate campaign, Vance praised Hungarian President Viktor Orban’s pro-family policies, which include forgiveness of loans for married couples if they have three children (and do not divorce). Similarly, he co-sponsored the “Higher Wages for American Workers Act” in 2023, which aimed to raise the minimum wage to $11 per hour. This bill also included provisions for indexing future increases to inflation (phased in more slowly so that small businesses can adjust), aligning with Catholic Social Teaching. Vance has also expressed a tougher line on abortion than Trump. In November 2023 he posted the following to X:
“There is something sociopathic about a political movement that tells young women (and men) that it is liberating to murder their own children. So let's keep fighting for our country's children, and let’s find a way to win.”
In 2021, Vance compared abortion to slavery, arguing it morally distorts society beyond its immediate victims, and in 2022, he expressed support for a national ban on the procedure. He joined other Republican lawmakers in 2023 in urging Attorney General Merrick Garland to enforce the 19th-century Comstock Act, which would restrict abortion by prohibiting the mailing of abortion pills and equipment. Although Vance has recently softened his rhetoric, aligning with Donald Trump’s preference for leaving the matter to individual states, his earlier position has remained unchanged.
The cultural mobilisation of Catholicism during Trump’s campaign offered a softer kind of influence. High-profile endorsements, like those from “CatholicVote” and the active participation of Catholic leaders in campaign events, suggest that appealing to Catholics has been useful in building a voter’s coalition. This was notably evident in Trump's strategic use of Catholic imagery, such as his references to the Lady of Guadalupe and his attendance at Catholic fundraisers like the Al Smith Dinner, which contrast with Kamala Harris's absence, highlighting a cultural strategy aimed at mobilizing Catholic voters.
Turning to specific figures, J.D. Vance’s conversion to Catholicism, his choice of St. Augustine as his confirmation saint, and his public avowing of policies in line with Catholic social teaching indicate a potential for deeper integration of Catholic thought into policymaking. His writings in The Lamp further illustrate his engagement with Catholic thought.
One of Vance’s long-standing political patrons is tech billionaire and co-founder of PayPal Peter Thiel, who endorsed and donated to Vance’s 2022 U.S. Senate campaign in Ohio. Thiel is not a Catholic, but is known for his interest in Catholic social theorist Rene Girard.
This does not translate into policy, though Girard's model of desire and scapegoating can inform political approaches to social cohesion and conflict resolution; so far, there is however no evidence that this will be the case, and it therefore remains more theoretical than practical.
Thiel generally understands that Girard recommends that one should avoid desire for objects being actively pursued by others, which in interviews, he has translated into an entrepreneurial ethic of innovation and market disruption (create a new market-offer, rather than compete in existing markets).
Trump’s approach to U.S. competitiveness, however, is precisely not one of relinquishing market-dominance in overcrowded sectors where competition is mounting in order to focus on innovating elsewhere. To the contrary, the incoming administration is interested in pushing back against China, for example, in various fields.
Thiel weds what we may call an “entrepreneurial” reading of Girard to Ayn Rand’s “objectivism,” whose philosophical underpinnings are quite distinct from Girard’s. It may be that this particular aspect of Thiel’s thought—to wit, elements of libertarianism combined with Christian-inspired, conservative-leaning social policy—will define the Trump administration. However, outside of specific measures, Trump is not a libertarian and is largely opposed to a libertarian approach to industrial policy and trade relations.
We may conclude that Trump’s record, the presence of Vance in the new administration, and related factors do suggest Catholic thought will play a more pronounced role than during other presidencies in shaping policy, but only as one ingredient among several, sometimes contradictory, ones.