ICE ERO Baltimore Arrests Guatemalan National Convicted of Multiple Sex Crimes
BALTIMORE — Officers with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) Baltimore arrested Daniel Pineda-Velasquez, a Guatemalan national, on February 9. The apprehension followed a targeted enforcement operation focused on individuals with severe criminal records.
According to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) records, Pineda-Velasquez has a history of multiple convictions in Prince George’s County, Maryland. These convictions include sex abuse of a minor, rape, third-degree sex offense, assault, and fourth-degree sex contact. Authorities confirmed that an immigration judge had previously ordered his removal from the United States in 2024, but he remained in the country until his recent arrest.
ERO Baltimore is the local field office responsible for the identification, arrest, and removal of noncitizens who present a danger to national security or public safety, as well as those who enter the United States in violation of immigration laws. This arrest coincides with a broader DHS initiative targeting what the agency describes as the “worst of the worst” offenders, including those convicted of violent crimes and sexual offenses.
While federal authorities cite arrests like Pineda-Velasquez’s as evidence of the necessity for strict interior enforcement, the publicizing of such cases remains a point of contention in the ongoing immigration debate. Advocacy groups and civil rights organizations often caution against the use of individual criminal cases to shape broader immigration policy. They argue that highlighting specific instances of violent crime can lead to the unfair stigmatization of the undocumented population at large, pointing to criminological data suggesting that immigrants constitute a lower crime risk than native-born citizens.
Furthermore, the arrest highlights the friction between federal enforcement and local “sanctuary” policies prevalent in jurisdictions like Maryland. Supporters of these policies argue they are essential for community safety, ensuring that victims and witnesses can engage with local police without fear of deportation. Conversely, federal officials contend that such policies impede their ability to take custody of individuals with criminal convictions before they are released back into the community.
thefederalist.com
dhs.gov
