Was the suspected murderer part of any federal or local vetting process tied to the Trump administration?
Executive summary
Available reporting shows the Washington, D.C., suspect, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, was granted asylum in April 2025 — after President Trump took office — and that U.S. counterterrorism authorities had vetted him before he entered the country (Reuters; FactCheck) [1] [2]. The Trump administration and allies blamed prior Biden-era vetting failures, while contemporaneous documents and news reporting indicate the asylum approval occurred under the Trump administration and that DHS/USCIS and other agencies performed multilayered screening [1] [3].
1. Who approved the suspect’s asylum — timeline and documented facts
Reuters reported that Lakanwal applied for asylum in December 2024 and was approved on April 23, 2025 — three months after President Trump took office — and that the government file said he had no known criminal history and had been vetted by U.S. officials [1]. FactCheck.org also notes that Trump administration officials publicly blamed the Biden administration for vetting failures even as reporting showed counterterrorism authorities had conducted vetting before Lakanwal entered the United States [2].
2. What federal vetting processes are said to have occurred
Multiple outlets and government materials describe the Operation Allies Welcome and refugee/asylum intake as “multi-layered and ongoing,” involving DHS and other agencies; TIME summarizes DHS language that those admitted went through “rigorous screening and vetting” [3]. Reuters’ review of government records likewise cites vetting by U.S. counterterrorism authorities in Lakanwal’s file [1].
3. How the Trump administration framed the incident — political claims vs. reporting
After the D.C. shooting, President Trump and senior aides sharply blamed the Biden administration’s “disastrous withdrawal” and alleged failures to vet Afghan entrants; GOP officials repeated this narrative in press briefings [2]. Reuters and FactCheck record the contradiction between those political claims and reporting that Lakanwal’s asylum was granted under Trump and that prior vetting had occurred [1] [2].
4. The administration’s policy response and the broader vetting debate
The Trump administration swiftly used the case to roll out tougher immigration and vetting measures: USCIS ordered reviews and re-interviews for refugees admitted from 2021–2025 and issued policy memos pausing benefits for nationals of specified countries, while executive orders in 2025 emphasized “extreme vetting” and expanded continuous vetting initiatives [4] [5] [6]. Media coverage and advocacy groups described these moves as part of a broader crackdown on immigration and a reversal of prior administration practices [7] [8].
5. Competing perspectives in the sources
Government and Trump-aligned officials argued the shooting exposed systemic vetting failures under Biden and justified immediate policy tightening [2] [1]. Reporting from Reuters, FactCheck and TIME presents a competing account: Lakanwal’s asylum was approved during the Trump administration and records indicate he underwent vetting, and DHS’ archived descriptions of Operation Allies Welcome characterize the screening as rigorous [1] [2] [3].
6. Limits of available reporting and unanswered questions
Available sources do not mention the detailed contents of Lakanwal’s full vetting file beyond summaries saying he “had been vetted” and “no known criminal history,” so precise agency findings, intelligence assessments, or any red flags flagged during processing are not described in current reporting [1] [2]. The public record summarized by news outlets does not provide the step‑by‑step vetting timeline that would show which specific checks were completed, when, and by which offices [1] [3].
7. Why the distinction of timing matters politically and legally
Who approved asylum and when matters because the incident became the linchpin for sweeping executive actions and policy pauses announced by the Trump administration — including re-interviews of roughly 233,000 refugees from 2021–2025 and holds on benefits from nationals of 19 countries — measures justified publicly as responses to vetting failures [4] [9] [5]. Reporting that Lakanwal’s approval came under Trump complicates Republican claims that Biden-era vetting alone was to blame [1] [2].
Conclusion — what readers should take away
Reporting from Reuters, FactCheck, and TIME shows the asylum approval occurred under the Trump administration and that U.S. authorities performed multilayered vetting before the suspect entered the U.S.; political leaders nevertheless attributed blame to the Biden administration and used the episode to justify expanded vetting and policy changes [1] [2] [3]. Exact details of the suspect’s vetting file are not published in the sources provided, leaving gaps that officials and journalists may need to fill for a full factual accounting [1].