Status of the shooter that tried to kill Trump
Executive summary
The shooter in the Nov. 26–27, 2025 ambush of two National Guard members near the White House has been publicly identified as Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29‑year‑old Afghan national who faces federal charges including first‑degree murder and assault with intent to kill while armed [1] [2]. Authorities and several news outlets report he entered the U.S. after 2021 and that asylum paperwork or resettlement records tied to him are the subject of competing accounts and an administration review [3] [2] [4].
1. Who the suspect is, and the formal charges
Federal prosecutors and news outlets identified the suspect as Rahmanullah Lakanwal and say he faces at least one count of first‑degree murder and two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed stemming from the ambush that killed Specialist Sarah Beckstrom and critically wounded Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe [1] [5]. Reuters, PBS and AP reporting confirm the federal criminal case and that investigators are probing motive, including treating the incident as a possible terrorism‑linked attack [2] [4] [6].
2. Conflicting timelines on how and when he entered the U.S.
Major outlets say Lakanwal is an Afghan national who “entered the U.S. in 2021,” language used by The New York Times and others to place his arrival in the post‑withdrawal period [3]. Reuters and PBS cite U.S. officials and anonymous administration sources that describe asylum or resettlement paperwork: one source said he applied for asylum in December 2024 and was approved April 23, 2025; other reporting ties his arrival to Afghan evacuation programs after 2021 [2] [4]. Snopes documents how social posts amplified claims that he was “granted legal asylum by the Trump administration in April 2025” but shows that reporting on asylum approvals was traced to a charity and anonymous government sources, not a single conclusive public record [7].
3. Policy and political fallout affecting his status
The shooting prompted immediate policy moves: the Trump administration halted asylum decisions and paused issuing visas for Afghan passport holders, and ordered reviews of Afghan arrivals and related programs [4] [8] [9]. Officials from the Trump White House have publicly blamed prior administrations and used the incident to justify immigration restrictions, while independent reporting notes some asylum paperwork linked to Lakanwal was handled through resettlement partners and sourced to anonymous government officials [2] [7].
4. What investigators say and what remains unconfirmed
Law enforcement has treated the case as a terrorism probe as they seek motive, and federal charges were filed; news pieces report investigators were still seeking motive and that the FBI is involved [2] [6]. Available sources do not mention a completed judicial determination of his guilt or conviction; court proceedings and forensic motive findings are still in process according to the reports [2] [1]. Sources do not provide a definitive public record of the exact immigration status label (e.g., asylum approval date tied directly to a specific administration) without reliance on anonymous or secondary sources [7] [2].
5. How reporting and social media have diverged
Social media posts claimed the shooter was vetted and granted asylum by the Trump administration; Snopes traces that viral claim to an X post and shows mainstream outlets relied on a mix of anonymous government sources and resettlement charities for details [7]. Major outlets — Reuters, NYT, AP, PBS and BBC — report the suspect’s Afghan nationality, alleged arrival timeline, and that asylum/resettlement links exist, but they differ on which administration handled parts of the process and on whether files were approved under one president or another; those differences have been emphasized politically [3] [2] [6] [4].
6. Why precision matters and what to watch next
Immigration and criminal status will shape both the legal case and policy responses. Current reporting shows arrests and charges, responsive executive orders and paused asylum workflows, but does not yet document final adjudication of immigration claims or court verdicts in the shooting case [1] [4]. Watch for court filings, public statements from prosecutors, and released asylum adjudication records to resolve outstanding questions that today rest on anonymous sourcing and administrative statements [2] [7].
Limitations: This briefing uses only the provided reporting; where sources differ or rely on anonymous officials, I note that tension rather than asserting an unverified fact [7] [2].