Gov. Gretchen Whitmer issued a pardon Thursday for Lue Yang, a Hmong illegal, living in Michigan and currently held by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Yang was scheduled for deportation today after federal authorities moved to remove him based on a felony conviction from the 1990s. While the conviction was expunged in 2018 under Michigan law, ICE did not recognize the expungement, leaving him in federal custody. His current location has not been publicly disclosed.
Whitmer’s pardon has not stopped his deportation but reflects Whitmer’s decision to intervene in a matter that is primarily under federal jurisdiction.
The decision highlights a significant conflict between state and federal authority on immigration enforcement. Federal policy under President Donald Trump emphasized deporting individuals with prior criminal convictions to protect public safety and uphold the rule of law. By issuing the pardon, Whitmer is directly challenging these federal priorities, asserting state discretion in an area governed by federal law.
Several Democratic representatives spoke to the press following the pardon, signaling their prioritization of illegal immigrants over public safety.
Rep. Emily Dievendorf, D-Lansing, said Yang’s case reflects a broader failure to consider the human impact of immigration policy.
“We are not taking into consideration whether something is legal or illegal, and we are harming our communities and families in the process,” Dievendorf said. “We have allowed our prejudices to lead the way.”
Rep. Mai Xiong, D-Warren, also commented on the stigma surrounding families caught in deportation cases.
“Many families don’t want to come forward because of the shame or embarrassment of knowing that their family member may have had a history,” Xiong said.
Rep. Penelope Tsernoglou, D-East Lansing, an advocate for the Hmong community, noted the historical connection between Hmong refugees and the United States.
“The Hmong people are here because their ancestors died for the American soldiers,” Tsrenoglou said. “They have a special refugee status, and they should be treated like American citizens.”
Yang’s case also illustrates discrepancies between state and federal treatment of criminal records. Although Michigan law recognizes his expungement, federal authorities have maintained his detention due to his illegal status, expressing differences in how convictions are enforced across legal systems. This raises broader questions about the limits of state pardons in federal immigration matters and the potential for states to influence outcomes in cases involving illegal individuals with prior convictions.
The situation reflects the ongoing struggle between state actions and federal immigration enforcement. The case raises questions about whether state officials should intervene in deportation proceedings that fall under federal jurisdiction and whether such actions weaken the consistent application of national immigration law.
