A federal judge appointed by President Biden ordered the release of an alleged MS-13 member wanted for murder in El Salvador, drawing sharp condemnation from the Department of Homeland Security and fueling criticism of California’s approach to public safety.

U.S. District Judge Jinsook Ohta ruled that immigration officials had violated the due process rights of David Antonio Aviles Perez by holding him for five months without a bond hearing or an individualized assessment of whether he was dangerous or likely to flee. As a result, Ohta ordered Aviles Perez’s immediate release from federal custody and barred Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from detaining him again unless an immigration judge determined renewed detention was warranted after a proper bond hearing.

The court’s order, issued on August 26 by the Southern District of California, came after ICE had arrested Aviles Perez in San Diego on March 26 and held him at the Otay Mesa Detention Center pending removal to El Salvador. The Department of Homeland Security confirmed that Aviles Perez was released from custody following the judge’s order.

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin blasted the decision, arguing that it put Americans at risk. "This radical activist judge has put American lives at risk by releasing a wanted murderer," Mullin said, adding, "This is now the SECOND time this dangerous illegal has been released back onto the streets in California." He blamed "sanctuary politicians" for prioritizing politics over safety, warning, "Because sanctuary politicians want to play politics from the bench, innocent Americans are in danger." Mullin pledged that his agency would not be deterred, stating, "DHS and ICE will not be deterred by these partisan games. If California’s leaders won’t protect Americans, DHS will."

Judge Ohta, who was nominated to the federal bench by President Biden in 2021 and previously appointed to the state court by California Governor Gavin Newsom, issued a pointed rebuke of immigration authorities in her ruling. "Although Petitioner appears to have previously been convicted following a fight with another individual in May 2023, the government has offered no evidence that it detained him after considering those facts and making an individualized determination of his danger to the public or flight risk," Ohta wrote, concluding there had been "no process before or after his detention."

MS-13 allegations, violent past, and Salvadoran warrant

The controversy around Aviles Perez’s release centers on his alleged ties to the violent MS-13 gang and a record that includes accusations of brutal crimes. Salvadoran prosecutors and U.S. officials have identified Aviles Perez as an active MS-13 member wanted for a 2014 gang murder in La Unión, El Salvador. According to Fox News reporting, he was sentenced in El Salvador to 20 years for aggravated murder stemming from an execution-style killing of an alleged MS-13 rival.

In addition to the Salvadoran warrant, Aviles Perez was arrested in California in 2023 after he allegedly swung a machete at a homeless man at Laguna Grande Park near Monterey State Beach. Ohta’s ruling referenced a conviction following a fight in May 2023 but noted that immigration authorities had not made any individualized determination regarding his risk to the public before holding him for months.

The New York Post described Aviles Perez as an MS-13 "executioner" with the nickname "the witch," emphasizing that he was captured by ICE in San Diego on an international aggravated murder warrant. The Post also noted that his release came despite the Salvadoran sentence and that he was part of a pattern where "criminal aliens are being released from ICE custody by activist judges on courts across the country," quoting an anonymous federal law enforcement official.

Court ruling did not clear Perez of alleged crimes or risk

Judge Ohta’s order did not clear Aviles Perez of wrongdoing in any of the alleged crimes or make a finding that he posed no danger to the community. Instead, her ruling focused on the lack of due process, specifically, that he was held for five months without an individualized hearing as required by the Fifth Amendment. The court barred ICE from re-detaining Aviles Perez unless a bond hearing was held and a judge determined renewed detention was justified.

Despite the serious allegations and Salvadoran conviction, the government was unable to present evidence that it had conducted the legally required assessment before detaining Aviles Perez for months. Ohta’s ruling made clear that the government’s procedural failure, not a reassessment of the underlying allegations, was determinative.

Pattern draws national scrutiny and fresh calls for accountability

The Aviles Perez case is only the latest incident to raise alarms about the release of violent foreign nationals from ICE custody in California and nationwide. The New York Post pointed to another case in which federal Judge Linda Lopez ordered a convicted murderer released from ICE detention while awaiting removal. Critics argue that activist judges and sanctuary policies are undermining public safety and stripping law enforcement of the tools needed to keep dangerous individuals off the streets.

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security’s public position has hardened. Secretary Mullin’s statements frame the issue as a direct threat to Americans, one created not by frontline agents but by judicial decisions and California’s political leadership. ICE and DHS claim they will continue efforts to remove criminal aliens, but their hands are now tied by court orders that set new procedural hurdles.

Open questions and consequences for public safety

Several unanswered questions remain. The record does not clarify whether Aviles Perez’s alleged crimes in California and El Salvador are directly connected, or if he will face any further legal consequences in the U.S. after his release. The article does not specify the current status of his removal to El Salvador or whether authorities there will seek extradition for the 2014 murder conviction.

More broadly, the case exposes the friction between federal immigration enforcement, state-level sanctuary policies, and the federal judiciary. When individuals with violent records are released on procedural grounds, the burden of risk falls squarely on the shoulders of ordinary Americans and local law enforcement.

As long as California’s political and judicial leaders continue to prioritize process over protection and sidestep the consequences of their decisions, Americans will be left to wonder whose side their government is really on.