Tim Walz Retaliates Against Rubio Deportation
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz's decision to recall roughly 100 members of the state's National Guard from Washington, D.C., has drawn renewed attention because it came just as Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the legal status of a convicted sex offender previously pardoned by Walz had been terminated, clearing the way for his deportation.
According to NPR, Walz initially deployed the Minnesota National Guard to the nation's capital to assist with security surrounding Fourth of July celebrations. The deployment occurred as the Trump administration expanded the National Guard's presence in Washington as part of a broader effort to address crime.
Reports indicate that more than 5,000 Guard members have been serving in the city in recent weeks, with the mission reportedly costing approximately $3 million per day.
Under Title 32 of the U.S. Code, National Guard troops can receive federal funding while remaining under the command of their respective governors. Walz emphasized that Minnesota's troops were deployed specifically for the Independence Day events.
NPR reported that Walz ordered the Guard members home after concluding they were being assigned to duties beyond the scope of the original mission. The deployment had been scheduled to continue through July 23.
Minnesota was one of several states led by Democratic governors that contributed Guard personnel to Washington. Michigan, Maryland, Hawaii, North Carolina, and Kentucky also participated.
The decision attracted additional attention because it came shortly after developments involving Tou Lue Vang, a Laotian immigrant whose criminal case has become the subject of political debate.
On July 1, the Department of Homeland Security announced that Walz, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, and Minnesota Supreme Court Chief Justice Natalie Hudson, acting as members of the state's Board of Pardons, voted to pardon Vang.
Vang was convicted in 2006 of first-degree criminal sexual conduct involving the abuse of a 10-year-old girl between 2002 and 2004. According to public records cited by DHS, Vang was 18 years old when the offenses occurred. The department also noted that he attempted to explain his conduct during the criminal proceedings as a "cultural thing."
Vang entered the United States in 1994 after receiving legal status during the Clinton administration. His conviction made him removable under federal immigration law, but the subsequent pardon prompted questions about its effect on his immigration case.
According to Fox News, Secretary of State Marco Rubio terminated Vang's legal status on Friday, allowing immigration authorities to move forward with his removal from the United States.
Rubio sharply criticized the pardon in a public statement.
"Just weeks ago, a foreign child rapist was freed to once again endanger America's children after receiving a pardon from Minnesota Governor Tim Walz," Rubio said.
"Tou Lue Vang admitted to committing heinous crimes against a 10-year-old girl in Minnesota. He attempted to pay his victim for her silence and dismissed his acts of child abuse as a 'minor thing.'"
Rubio added, "Just days before he was scheduled to be deported, the Minnesota Governor pardoned him, setting him free to endanger American families once again."
The sequence of events has fueled criticism from Walz's political opponents, who argue that the pardon complicated an otherwise straightforward deportation process and question the governor's decision to end Minnesota's Guard deployment in Washington before its originally scheduled conclusion.
Supporters of Walz, however, have noted that governors retain command authority over National Guard units operating under Title 32 status and that the administration stated the recall was based on the mission no longer matching the deployment's original purpose.
The governor's office has maintained that the Minnesota Guard was sent to support Fourth of July events rather than broader policing operations. Meanwhile, the decision to pardon Vang—and the subsequent federal action allowing his deportation—continues to generate debate over the intersection of state clemency powers and federal immigration enforcement.