The Minnesota Board of Pardons, which includes Governor Tim Walz, granted clemency to a man convicted of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl, reigniting debate over crime, deportation, and executive clemency.

Quick Take

• The Minnesota Board of Pardons granted Tou Lue Vang a pardon on June 10.
• The victim sent a letter supporting the pardon, according to reporting from The New York Times.
• The pardon clears Vang’s criminal record and may help him challenge his deportation order.
• The case has drawn sharp criticism from federal officials and Republican lawmakers.

What the Board Decided

The Minnesota Board of Pardons granted Tou Lue Vang a pardon after a special review process that included Governor Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison, and Supreme Court Chief Justice Natalie Hudson. The pardon followed a recommendation from the Minnesota Clemency Review Commission, which reviewed the case in April and endorsed clemency before the board acted.

Reporting says Vang had pleaded guilty to first-degree criminal sexual conduct tied to repeated abuse of a 10-year-old girl two decades ago. The New York Times reported that the victim also sent a letter backing the pardon, and Ellison’s office said the board reached a unanimous result after considering that support and community letters.

Why the Pardon Matters

The pardon matters because it can erase a state conviction for immigration purposes in many cases. Legal research from Albany Law School says a state governor’s pardon often removes the deportation trigger tied to a conviction, although some offenses can still leave room for federal immigration action.

That means the pardon does not guarantee Vang will stay in the United States. It does, however, give him a stronger legal position to fight removal, which is why the decision drew immediate attention from immigration officials and critics who say state leaders should not be easing the path for a convicted sex offender.

Political Backlash Builds

The Department of Homeland Security blasted the pardon as “insane” and accused Minnesota leaders of putting criminal noncitizens ahead of the public. Republican U.S. Representative Pete Stauber also condemned the move, and local reporting noted that a law expert said the deportation order could possibly be rescinded if the pardon holds up.

A PARDON for rape? I guess Tim Walz agrees "this is a minor thing" – when a minor child gets raped.

Minnesota deserves better…yet…they won't say shit even when their mouths are full of it. pic.twitter.com/iAFKJRTF1D

— Republic Kat (@DeClauseKat) July 2, 2026

The uproar fits a larger pattern in which state clemency decisions collide with federal immigration law. Minnesota officials argued that the board looked at Vang’s remorse, the victim’s support, and the long gap since the offense. Critics saw something else: a Democratic governor using state power to shield a convicted sex offender from the consequences of his crime and from removal under federal law.

What Comes Next

The pardon does not end the immigration case by itself, and federal authorities still control deportation enforcement. But the board’s action has now cleared one major obstacle for Vang and given his legal team a new opening to challenge the removal order that was already in motion.

For conservative readers, the case is likely to land as another example of soft-on-crime politics meeting immigration loopholes. The core facts are plain: a man convicted of sexually abusing a child received a state pardon, and that pardon may now interfere with federal deportation efforts.

Sources:

townhall.com, foxnews.com, fox9.com, mn.gov, nyulawreview.org