DHS Release Photo Of Pardoned Illegal Rapist!

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz pardoned a convicted child sex offender facing deportation, and the federal government deported him anyway.

Story Snapshot

The Minnesota Board of Pardons voted unanimously on June 10 to pardon Tou Lue Vang, a Laotian national convicted of sexually abusing a 10-year-old girl in 2005.
The Department of Homeland Security condemned the pardon, saying it could block Vang’s deportation — then deported him regardless.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced Vang’s removal, with DHS releasing a photo of him being deported.
Governor Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison defended the pardon, citing victim support and a formal review process.

A Child’s Abuser, a Governor’s Pardon, and a Federal Showdown

In 2005, Tou Lue Vang pleaded guilty to sexually abusing a 10-year-old girl in Minnesota. He was 42 years old at the time of the pardon and had been living in the United States as an undocumented Laotian national. Federal immigration authorities had set his deportation in motion. Then, three weeks before his scheduled removal, Minnesota’s top officials stepped in.

On June 10, the Minnesota Board of Pardons voted unanimously to grant Vang a full pardon. The three-member board includes Governor Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison, and the Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court. All three voted yes. Walz and Ellison defended the decision, pointing to a formal review process, a recommendation from the Clemency Review Commission, a large volume of community support letters, and — most notably — a statement of support from the victim herself.

DHS Called It a Deliberate Move to Block Removal

The Department of Homeland Security did not hold back. The agency released a public statement saying, “Governor Walz’s decision to pardon an illegal alien convicted of child sexual abuse could thwart his deportation.” The Trump administration framed the pardon as an act of political interference with federal immigration enforcement. The timing — just weeks before a scheduled removal — made that argument hard to dismiss.

Minnesota House Republican Floor Leader Harry Niska called the pardon an outrage. Critics across the country pointed out that whatever the victim chose to do privately, a state pardon board does not get to override federal immigration law. That argument turned out to be correct, at least in this case.

Rubio Announced the Deportation — With a Photo

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that Tou Lue Vang had been deported. The Department of Homeland Security released a photo of Vang being removed from the country, a pointed message to Minnesota officials. The White House Press Pool put it plainly: “Minnesota Democrats Pardoned a Convicted Child Rapist. President Trump Deported Him.” The federal government had made its point with a picture worth more than any press release.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the deportation of Tou Lue Vang, weeks after Gov. Tim Walz and Keith Ellison voted to pardon him. https://t.co/hpNYpbxzoH

— Justwondering (@frespch4all) July 10, 2026

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement confirmed the removal on its official account, noting that the Minnesota Board of Pardons had voted on June 10 to grant the pardon. The agency made clear that a state pardon does not automatically erase the federal grounds for deportation, particularly in cases involving serious criminal convictions like child sexual abuse.

The Pardon Defense Does Not Hold Up to Common Sense

Walz and Ellison leaned hard on the victim’s support letter as moral cover. That support deserves respect — it took courage. But a victim’s forgiveness is a personal act. It does not change what happened, and it does not change the law. A man who pleaded guilty to sexually abusing a child, who entered and remained in this country illegally, was facing the legal consequence of deportation. The pardon board’s job was not to shield him from that consequence.

The board’s decision to act just weeks before a scheduled removal looks less like justice and more like a political maneuver. The federal government saw it the same way — and acted accordingly. When a state board uses its clemency power to help an undocumented convicted child sex offender avoid removal, reasonable people are right to ask whose interests are actually being served. The answer here was not the public’s.

What This Case Reveals About State vs. Federal Power

This is not the first time a state pardon has collided with a federal deportation order. Minnesota is not alone in testing these limits. But the Vang case is a clean example of what happens when state officials prioritize clemency politics over public safety and federal law. The deportation happened anyway. That outcome should be the rule, not the exception, when the underlying crime involves a child victim and an undocumented offender.