DHS blasts Walz over pardon of child sex offender
The Department of Homeland Security sharply criticized Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz after the state Board of Pardons granted a full pardon to Tou Lue Vang, warning the pardon could hinder Vang's deportation.[1]
DHS called Vang an illegal immigrant from Laos and said the pardon may affect his removal.[1] Minnesota's attorney general pushed back, saying DHS's statement was false and accusing the department of political retaliation.[1]
ICE detained Tou Lue Vang in December 2025 during Operation Metro Surge and issued a deportation notice tied to a final removal order from October 31, 2006. Vang was convicted in 2006 of first-degree criminal sexual conduct for repeated assaults on a child, served prison time, completed a 30-year probation term, and had his civil rights later restored by a Ramsey County court. The Minnesota Clemency Review Commission recommended a pardon in April 2026 after reviewing Vang's remorse letter, the victim's written support and community letters, and the Board unanimously approved a full pardon on June 10, 2026.
The victim submitted a written statement saying she had forgiven Vang and wanted his family to stay together, a factor Chief Justice Natalie Hudson cited when casting her vote.[1] Under some immigration-law interpretations, a state pardon can erase immigration consequences for certain crimes but does not affect many aggravated-felony or controlled-substance grounds, leaving unsettled whether the pardon will ultimately block federal removal.
The mainstream summary does not mention that the Minnesota Board of Pardons granted a total of 33 pardons in a single meeting, which highlights a broader context of the state's approach to clemency and rehabilitation. This suggests that Vang's case is part of a larger trend in Minnesota's criminal justice system, where the board is actively working to address past convictions and provide second chances to individuals who have shown remorse and community support.[2]
Additionally, the summary overlooks the complexities of how state pardons interact with federal immigration laws. While it states that a pardon could hinder Vang's deportation, it does not clarify that under certain interpretations of the Immigration and Nationality Act, a state pardon can negate immigration consequences for some crimes but may not apply to aggravated felonies or controlled-substance offenses. This nuanced legal interpretation could significantly impact Vang's immigration status and the ongoing debate surrounding his pardon.[3]
Show source details & analysis (1 source)
📊 Relevant Data
The Minnesota Board of Pardons granted 33 pardons (and one commutation) in a single eight-hour meeting held in July 2025.
Sorrow and redemption: Minnesota pardon board grants 33 pardons — News From The States
Under Board of Immigration Appeals interpretations of the Immigration and Nationality Act, a state pardon negates immigration consequences for some criminal removal grounds (such as certain crimes involving moral turpitude) but has no effect on others, including many aggravated felony and controlled-substance offenses.
Deporting the Pardoned — UC Davis Law Review / UGA Faculty Scholarship
📌 Key Facts
- The Minnesota Clemency Review Commission recommended, and the Board of Pardons unanimously approved, a full pardon for Tou Lue Vang on June 10, 2026.
- Vang was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct in 2006 for repeated assaults on a child; he served prison time and completed a 30‑year probation term, with Ramsey County court later restoring his civil rights.
- DHS publicly condemned Gov. Walz for the pardon and claims Vang is an illegal immigrant from Laos whose deportation may be affected, while the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office says DHS is lying and that the pardon does not block removal.
- The victim submitted a written statement supporting the pardon, saying she has forgiven Vang, believes he has changed, and wants his family to stay together, and Chief Justice Hudson cited that statement as a key factor in her vote.
- The Attorney General’s Office framed DHS’s statement as part of a broader pattern of political retaliation by the federal administration against Minnesota, explicitly accusing the department of repeatedly lying to the public.
📰 Source Timeline (1)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time