Yesterday, we wrote about a man who was convicted of repeatedly raping a 10-year-old girl but has now been pardoned by a three person panel including Governor Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison. We reported that the pardon had been issued to help the man — to whom a Department of Justice immigration judge issued a final order of removal on October 31, 2006 — avoid being deported.
Attorney General Ellison is now under fire for this decision, but he disputes the idea that he pardoned this child rapist so that he could remain in Minnesota.
KSTP reports a statement from Ellison’s office:
DHS is lying through their teeth about this pardon. It does not protect Vang from deportation. And before Trump and his allies say a word about what anyone else does, they should stop pardoning pedophiles, fraudsters, and law-enforcement assaulting insurrectionists. It’s baffling that the media would highlight this singular decision from a month ago based on a false statement from an agency that has lied repeatedly to the American people and that’s part of an administration waging a relentless campaign of harassment and retaliation against Minnesota, including by unlawfully weaponizing criminal investigations.
Leave aside Ellison’s argument that it is ok for him to pardon child rapists because President Trump is also issuing pardons and Ellison’s assertion that he is the victim in all this, the question remains: If this pardon was not issued to help a child rapist remain in Minnesota, why was it issued at all?
It is not a decision without consequences besides its impact on the deportation proceedings. The letter confirming the pardon explains that this man — who was convicted of repeatedly raping a 10-year-old girl — is no longer:
…required to disclose the conviction at any time or place other than: (1) in a judicial proceeding; or (2) during the licensing process for peace officers.
There are still many questions that need to be answered.