Major Newspaper Praises Walz On Pardon

A man convicted of repeatedly s****lly assaulting a 10-year-old girl has now been deported to his native Laos, but only after federal officials intervened following a pardon approved by Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and the state’s Board of Pardons.

Tou Lue Vang had already been subject to immigration consequences because of his criminal record. According to accounts of the case, Secretary of State Marco Rubio later revoked Vang’s legal status, clearing the way for his removal from the United States.

The disturbing facts of the underlying crime are difficult to overstate. Vang reportedly told investigators that he viewed what happened as a “mistake” and “a minor thing,” while suggesting that such conduct was considered normal in the society where he grew up. That explanation did not lessen the seriousness of the offense. A child was repeatedly abused, and the person responsible appeared to minimize the harm he caused.

Vang initially received a 12-year prison sentence, yet he reportedly spent only eight months confined in a county facility. He remained in the United States for years afterward, built a family and raised children of his own. Those later circumstances became part of the case for granting him clemency.

The Minnesota Clemency Review Commission supported the pardon by a 4-2 vote. Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison and Minnesota Supreme Court Chief Justice Natalie Hudson then voted unanimously in favor of it. Supporters pointed to Vang’s completion of probation, his expressions of remorse, his lack of additional known criminal convictions and a letter of support from the victim. They also acknowledged that a pardon could affect his immigration status.

Federal officials took a different view. The Trump administration moved forward with Vang’s deportation, arguing that noncitizens convicted of serious crimes should not be protected from removal through state clemency.

Walz criticized the result after Vang was sent to Laos. He questioned whether the deportation made the public safer and raised concerns about the effect on Vang’s children. He also argued that people should not always be defined solely by the worst thing they have done.

That argument may resonate in cases involving rehabilitation, lesser offenses, or isolated mistakes. It becomes much harder to accept when the crime involved the repeated sexual abuse of a child. Some actions reveal an extraordinary capacity to harm another person. They also create consequences that may continue long after a sentence has been completed.