A new showdown between California and Washington is escalating — and immigration enforcement is once again at the center of the storm.
The Department of Homeland Security under President Donald Trump is sharply criticizing California Governor Gavin Newsom after he granted a pardon to a Cambodian national previously convicted of attempted murder and assault with a firearm.
Federal officials warn the decision could allow the individual to remain in the United States instead of being deported — despite a prior removal order.
For many Americans concerned about border security and violent crime, this development is raising serious questions.
DHS: Pardon Could Disrupt Deportation Order
According to DHS, the individual — identified as Somboon Phaymany — lost his lawful permanent resident status following felony convictions. An immigration judge ordered him removed from the country in 2019.
However, federal officials say the governor’s pardon could potentially allow the case to be reopened in immigration court.
Tricia McLaughlin, Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at DHS, criticized the move, arguing that removing the underlying convictions may affect federal removal eligibility.
DHS officials say this case reflects what they describe as an ongoing pattern of resistance to federal immigration enforcement in California.
Sanctuary Policies and ICE Detainers Under Scrutiny
Under President Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, federal authorities say Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has intensified efforts to remove criminal illegal aliens from American communities.
But DHS argues that California’s sanctuary policies and local decisions not to honor ICE detainer requests are undermining those efforts.
An ICE detainer is a request for local law enforcement to temporarily hold an individual so federal immigration authorities can assume custody.
According to DHS data released in early February:
- 33,179 active ICE detainers remain in California
- 4,561 detainers have allegedly not been honored since January 20, 2025
- Released individuals were reportedly tied to serious crimes including homicide, assault, burglary, robbery, weapons violations, drug trafficking, and sexual offenses
Federal officials say cooperation between local and federal authorities is essential for public safety.
Federal Officials Cite Public Safety Concerns
DHS also referenced several recent arrests involving foreign nationals accused of violent crimes, gang affiliations, and sexual offenses. Federal officials argue that refusing detainers increases the likelihood that dangerous offenders remain in local communities.
For many voters — especially older Americans who prioritize law and order — the concern is straightforward: Should states block federal removal efforts involving individuals convicted of violent crimes?
That question now sits at the center of a growing political divide.
Newsom’s Office Defends the Clemency Process
Governor Newsom’s office pushed back strongly.
A spokesperson stated that California’s clemency process is “transparent” and involves individualized review focused on rehabilitation and public safety — not political considerations.
The governor’s team also accused federal critics of selectively applying outrage when it comes to executive clemency powers.
Immigration Enforcement Remains a Defining Trump Issue
Immigration enforcement continues to be one of the defining pillars of President Trump’s administration. His supporters argue that strong border security and interior enforcement are essential to national safety and sovereignty.
Meanwhile, sanctuary-state leaders maintain that local law enforcement should not be compelled to act as federal immigration agents.
As this latest dispute unfolds, it highlights a broader national debate over states’ rights, executive clemency, public safety, and federal immigration authority.
With deportation policy, ICE cooperation, and violent crime all playing major roles in the 2026 and 2028 political landscape, this case may prove to be more than just a single pardon — it could signal the next phase of a larger immigration battle.
Why This Story Matters
For Americans concerned about:
- Border security
- Violent crime
- State vs. federal authority
- Immigration court enforcement
- Sanctuary policies
This case represents a key flashpoint in the ongoing immigration debate.
Whether voters see it as a question of rehabilitation or a matter of public safety may ultimately shape how immigration policy evolves in the years ahead.