California Gov. Gavin Newsom pardoned an illegal immigrant convicted of attempted murder, assault with a semi-automatic firearm, and conspiracy to commit assault with a firearm, a move the Department of Homeland Security says effectively blocks the man's deportation and allows him to remain in California communities.

Somboon Phaymany was sentenced in 1997 to 14 years to life. He lost his green card, was placed in removal proceedings, and was issued a final order of removal by a judge in 2019. He was, by every legal measure, supposed to leave the country.

Then Gavin Newsom stepped in.

In December 2025, Newsom granted Phaymany executive clemency, wiping out the convictions that made him removable under federal immigration law. According to DHS, the pardon allows Phaymany to "re-open immigration proceedings rather than be removed from the U.S. and will be able to remain in California communities."

DHS fires back

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin did not mince words:

Gov. Newsom pardoning an illegal alien convicted of attempted murder, so he can remain in our country is absolute INSANITY."

Gavin Newsom's pardon took away this attempted murderer's qualifying convictions that made him removable from the U.S.

That's the mechanical reality of what happened here. A federal judge ordered Phaymany removed. According to the New York Post, Newsom's pardon erased the underlying convictions, which effectively pulled the legal rug out from under federal enforcement. A state governor used clemency power to override a federal immigration order. That's not mercy. That's obstruction dressed in a suit.

McLaughlin connected the case to a broader pattern:

These are the criminal illegal aliens he and his sanctuary politicians are protecting. He is putting the lives of all Americans at risk.

The governor's defense

Newsom's office told critics to "spare us the outrage." His spokesperson, Diana Crofts-Pelayo, offered a counterattack aimed squarely at the Trump administration:

The same people who turned the pardon power into a rewards program for political loyalists and the rich don't get to lecture anyone about clemency.

She added that California's process is "a transparent, rigorous legal process focused on individualized review of each applicant's rehabilitation and public safety considerations — not political favors."

In his pardon notice, Newsom wrote that there was "evidence that he is living an upright life and has demonstrated his fitness for restoration of civic rights and responsibilities." He also added a caveat that the clemency "does not minimize or forgive his conduct or the harm it caused."

So the pardon doesn't minimize the crime, it just eliminates its legal consequences. That distinction may comfort the governor's communications team. It does nothing for the public whose safety depends on immigration law being enforced.

The rehabilitation narrative

The governor's office described Phaymany as someone who was 19 at the time of his conviction, was a passenger in a car that confronted rival gang members in a parking lot 30 years ago, and was not the shooter. He was discharged from parole with a perfect record in 2023, now serves as the primary caretaker for his elderly parents, volunteers with his Buddhist and Unitarian church communities, and mentors at-risk youth.

Several elected officials backed the pardon, including Monica Montgomery Steppe, Paloma Aguirre, Terra Lawson-Remer, Sean Elo-Rivera, and Jose Rodriguez.

None of this is irrelevant. People do change. Rehabilitation is real. But there is a difference between acknowledging someone's personal growth and using it as a mechanism to nullify federal law. Newsom didn't simply say Phaymany has turned his life around. He weaponized the pardon power to ensure a man with a final removal order stays in the United States.

A governor who believes an individual merits compassion can say so publicly. He can advocate. He can petition. What he did instead was something far more consequential: he stripped federal authorities of their ability to enforce a lawful deportation order.

A pattern, not an exception

This case doesn't exist in isolation. The federal government alleges that at least 4,500 illegal immigrants with criminal backgrounds have been released back onto American streets by California. Earlier this month, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement sent a letter to Newsom and the state attorney general urging them to stop "sanctuary" policies and asking whether the state would be complying with immigration detainers.

California's answer, apparently, is to pardon convicted criminals out of their deportation orders.

The governor's press office even posted on X, invoking the Lenten season:

During this Lenten season — a time of repentance and forgiveness — we will continue to take our cues from religious leaders, not those who claim Christian nationalism but can't tell Peter from Paul.

There it is. The California playbook in a single post: wrap defiance in theology, accuse your critics of hypocrisy, and hope no one notices you just shielded a convicted attempted murderer from federal immigration enforcement.

The real question

The debate here isn't really about whether Somboon Phaymany is a different man than the 19-year-old who rode into that parking lot three decades ago. Maybe he is. The debate is about whether a governor should be able to single-handedly neutralize a federal removal order by erasing the convictions it rests on.

If the answer is yes, then sanctuary policy has evolved from non-cooperation into active sabotage. Cities refusing to honor detainers was one thing. A governor personally dismantling the legal basis for deportation is another thing entirely.

Newsom's office says the process was transparent and rigorous. DHS says it was insanity. The facts say a man with a final order of removal is staying in California because the governor decided he should.

That's not clemency. That's policy by pardon.