Rubio says convicted child rapist pardoned by Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is sent out of the US

Convicted Child Rapist Deported After Minnesota Governor Tim Walz’s Pardon

Rubio says convicted child rapist pardoned – U.S. Senator Marco Rubio has voiced strong criticism over the recent deportation of a convicted child rapist following a pardon granted by Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. The individual, Tou Lue Vang, a Lao citizen, was removed from the country after being cleared of his criminal record through the state’s clemency process. Rubio emphasized that the decision to pardon Vang, who was previously convicted for sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl between 2002 and 2004, undermines efforts to protect American citizens from foreign criminals.

Rubio’s Stance on the Deportation

Rubio’s statement highlighted concerns about the safety of U.S. communities, particularly children, from individuals with a history of violent crimes. “The fact that a convicted child rapist was pardoned and then sent back to his home country is a positive step,” Rubio said, underscoring the importance of holding offenders accountable for their actions. His remarks came as part of a broader critique of policies that allow dangerous individuals to remain in the U.S. after being pardoned by state officials.

“Allowing a foreign child rapist to stay in the U.S. after a pardon is a clear failure to prioritize public safety,” Rubio added.

Details of the Conviction and Pardon Process

Vang was convicted in 2006 of first-degree criminal sexual conduct for repeatedly assaulting a 10-year-old girl. The case revealed a pattern of abuse, with prosecutors alleging that the victim was offered $10 to remain silent. Vang’s defense claimed the act was a “cultural thing,” implying the child shared some responsibility. Despite these arguments, the conviction was upheld, and he was ordered deported in 2006. However, the Minnesota Clemency Review Commission later granted him a pardon, which was finalized just days before his removal from the country.

The pardon process in Minnesota allows governors to revoke legal status for individuals convicted of crimes, provided they meet specific criteria. Critics argue that Walz’s decision to pardon Vang, who had a history of sexual abuse, sends a message that even serious offenders can escape consequences through state-level clemency. This has sparked debates about the balance between mercy and justice in immigration cases involving convicted child rapists.

DHS’s Response to the Pardon

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) defended the deportation of Vang, stating that the decision was a direct result of the Minnesota pardon. Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis of DHS expressed disappointment, noting that the governor’s action allowed Vang to remain in the U.S. for an extended period. “ICE deported Tou Vang, a convicted child rapist, after his legal status was revoked. This is a prime example of how sanctuary policies can shield dangerous individuals from accountability,” Bis explained.

“The Minnesota governor’s decision to pardon Vang aligns with policies that protect criminal illegal aliens. But we will always prioritize the safety of American citizens,” Bis asserted.

Immigration Proceedings Timeline

Vang entered the United States in 1994 and was granted legal status during the Clinton administration. His status was revoked in 2006 after the conviction and a final removal order. ICE arrested him in December 2025, but he was released in February 2026 via a federal court order. The Minnesota Clemency Review Commission then granted him a pardon on June 10, 2026, which led to his deportation. This timeline illustrates the complex interplay between state clemency and federal immigration enforcement, especially in cases involving convicted child rapists.

Rubio’s comments reflect growing bipartisan concern over the impact of state pardons on federal deportation efforts. While some argue that clemency provides a chance for rehabilitation, others believe it allows offenders to avoid the full consequences of their crimes. The case of Vang has become a focal point in discussions about how to handle foreign criminals with a history of sexual abuse, particularly when they are granted pardons by state governors.

Public and Political Reactions

Reactions to Vang’s deportation have been mixed, with some applauding the action as a victory for public safety and others criticizing it as a result of political maneuvering. Rubio’s statement has drawn attention to the role of state governors in influencing federal immigration policy, especially when they issue pardons for convicted child rapists. Supporters of the decision argue that it demonstrates the effectiveness of federal immigration enforcement, while opponents claim it highlights a lack of coordination between state and federal authorities.

Additionally, the case has reignited conversations about the broader implications of pardons for foreign offenders. Critics point to the Minnesota governor’s decision as a potential precedent, where a convicted child rapist could be freed to return to their home country after serving time. This raises questions about the adequacy of current immigration policies in preventing recidivism among dangerous individuals, even after they receive clemency.