Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz joined the state's Board of Pardons in granting clemency to a 42-year-old Laotian national convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct against a 10-year-old girl, a move that effectively blocked the man's scheduled deportation and drew immediate condemnation from the Department of Homeland Security.
The pardon of Tou Lue Vang was approved on June 10 at a meeting of the Minnesota Clemency Review Commission, which Walz chairs. Vang had been detained under the Trump administration's "Operation Metro Surge" immigration crackdown and was slated for removal to Laos. The Washington Examiner reported the pardon came just one week before Vang's scheduled deportation, a timeline that makes the intent unmistakable.
The pardon erased Vang's sexual assault conviction, the very conviction that had revoked his legal immigration status and made him removable from the United States. Without it, federal authorities have no qualifying criminal basis to deport him.
Vang pleaded guilty in 2006 to first-degree criminal sexual conduct for repeatedly sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl over a period spanning 2002 to 2006. Despite the severity of the charge, he avoided jail time at sentencing. He had originally received legal immigration status in 1994 under the Clinton administration, but that status was revoked following the conviction.
A final deportation order was issued in 2006. For years, Vang remained in the country. When federal immigration enforcement finally caught up with him during Operation Metro Surge, the state of Minnesota stepped in.
The Clemency Review Commission's executive director, Carli Stark, sent Vang a letter after the pardon. The New York Post reported that the letter read:
"Being granted a pardon is a notable achievement and a reflection of the work you have done since your conviction."
A "notable achievement." For a man who sexually abused a child for years. That is the language Minnesota's clemency apparatus chose.
The Department of Homeland Security did not mince words. DHS Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis issued a public statement condemning the decision. As Fox News reported, Bis said:
"Governor Tim Walz's decision to pardon an illegal alien convicted child rapist so he can remain in our country is disgusting."
Bis went further, spelling out the legal consequence: the pardon strips Vang of the qualifying convictions that made him removable from the United States. In other words, a state governor used the pardon power to override a federal deportation order, not to correct an injustice, but to shield a convicted sex offender from the consequences of his crime.
This is not a case where the underlying facts are in dispute. Vang pleaded guilty. The conviction was not overturned on appeal. No court found error. The governor simply wiped the record clean.
Walz's office, when pressed on the decision, pointed to a letter the victim submitted to the board in support of the pardon. The New York Times reported that Walz's office said such pleas for clemency carry "significant weight." That is the full extent of the governor's public justification, as reported by Breitbart.
Set aside for a moment the question of what led a victim, who was a child when the abuse began, to write that letter. The governor's argument amounts to this: because the victim asked for it, the state was right to erase a felony sex conviction and prevent federal law enforcement from deporting the man responsible.
That reasoning collapses under its own weight. Pardons exist to address miscarriages of justice or to recognize genuine rehabilitation in cases where the public interest is served. They do not exist to obstruct federal immigration enforcement. Walz did not merely show mercy. He used the pardon power as a tool to prevent a lawful deportation, and he did it for a man convicted of one of the most serious crimes on the books.
The governor's track record on accountability does not inspire confidence. Vice President Vance has already referred Walz to the Department of Justice over evidence of massive welfare fraud in Minnesota, a scandal that has dogged the governor for years.
The Vang pardon is not a one-off. In May, the same Minnesota Board of Pardons granted clemency to another Laotian citizen, Jai Vang, whose criminal record included convictions for robbery, armed robbery of a business, and driving under the influence. Fox News reported that case as part of a broader pattern of Minnesota officials shielding illegal immigrants with violent criminal histories from federal deportation.
Two pardons of foreign nationals with serious criminal records in back-to-back months. Both timed to block deportation proceedings. Both approved by a board chaired by the governor.
This is not compassion. It is policy, a deliberate use of state power to frustrate federal immigration law. And it fits a larger pattern in Walz's Minnesota. A state oversight report found that the Walz administration shielded fraud suspects by branding auditors who raised alarms as racists. When accountability came knocking, the governor's instinct was to protect the wrongdoers and attack the people doing their jobs.
The same instinct is on display here. Federal agents did their jobs. They detained a convicted sex offender under a valid deportation order. And the governor of Minnesota stepped in to undo it.
Several questions remain unanswered. What specific legal mechanism allows a state pardon to nullify a federal deportation order? Can federal authorities pursue removal on other grounds? Was Walz's office in contact with Vang's legal team or advocacy groups before the pardon was granted? And what role, if any, did Minnesota's sanctuary policies play in keeping Vang in the country for nearly two decades after his deportation order was issued?
Walz has not addressed these questions publicly. His office's sole defense, the victim's letter, does not explain why the governor believes a state pardon should override federal law, or why the Board of Pardons treated a first-degree sexual assault conviction as something to be celebrated as a "notable achievement."
The governor's pattern of evasion on accountability matters is well established. A GOP lawmaker revealed that Walz skipped a fraud hearing while physically inside the state Capitol, a moment that captured the governor's approach to oversight in miniature.
Meanwhile, the practical consequence of the pardon is concrete and immediate. A man who pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a child over a four-year period will remain in the United States. The conviction that should have sent him home has been erased. The federal government's ability to remove him has been deliberately undermined by the state official who chairs the pardoning body.
This is the second time in recent months that Walz's leadership has drawn federal scrutiny. He ousted his own DHS commissioner one day before a confirmation hearing tied to the state's fraud fallout, another instance of the governor acting to control the narrative rather than face accountability.
Consider what Walz chose to prioritize. Not the safety of the community where Vang lives. Not the principle that foreign nationals who commit serious crimes in this country forfeit their right to remain. Not the integrity of federal immigration enforcement. Not even the long-term interests of the victim, who was a child when the abuse began and whose letter, whatever its contents, cannot change the underlying facts of the crime.
Walz prioritized keeping a convicted sex offender in the country over cooperating with a lawful deportation. He used the most extraordinary power available to a governor, the power to erase a criminal conviction, not to correct an injustice, but to obstruct federal law enforcement.
DHS called it disgusting. That word does a lot of work, but it may not do enough. What Walz did was a deliberate act of institutional sabotage, using the pardon power for a purpose it was never designed to serve. It tells every illegal immigrant with a criminal record in Minnesota that the governor has their back, and it tells every victim, every law enforcement officer, and every taxpayer that their interests come second.
When a governor will pardon a child sex offender to score points against federal immigration enforcement, the question is no longer about policy disagreements. It is about judgment, and Tim Walz has shown the country exactly where his lies.
