Which US agency or court handled Rahmanullah Lakanwal’s asylum decision?
Executive summary
Available reporting indicates Rahmanullah Lakanwal applied for asylum in December 2024 and was approved on April 23, 2025; news outlets attribute that approval to the Trump administration but do not consistently name the specific adjudicating agency or court in the public documents reviewed for this query (approval date cited by Reuters, CNN-linked outlets, ABC) [1] [2] [3].
1. Who approved the asylum decision that reporting cites?
Several outlets report that Lakanwal’s asylum application was filed in December 2024 and “approved on April 23” of 2025, and that the approval occurred during President Donald Trump’s term — language repeated in Reuters, Reuters’ dossier summary, ABC News and multiple U.S. outlets [1] [2] [3]. Those accounts identify the timing of approval (April 23, 2025) and attribute responsibility to the incumbent administration, not a named adjudicative body [1] [2].
2. What agencies typically handle asylum approvals — background readers should know
In U.S. federal practice, affirmations about “an asylum application being approved” can reflect different processes: affirmative asylum applications submitted to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) or defensive applications adjudicated by immigration judges (Executive Office for Immigration Review) after removal proceedings. Public reporting about Lakanwal does not specify whether his approval was an affirmative USCIS grant, an immigration judge order, or an outcome tied to other humanitarian parole/processing channels; the articles simply state that asylum was “approved” in April 2025 (available sources do not mention the specific adjudicating agency or court) [1] [2].
3. What the reports do say about vetting and how that relates to the decision
Reporting notes multiple vetting steps and federal reviews connected to Afghan evacuees. Reuters and BBC cite government files and statements saying Lakanwal had been “vetted by the U.S.” because of prior work with U.S. partners in Afghanistan and that file reviewers “found no potentially disqualifying information” before admission or later adjudication; those descriptions concern vetting, not the precise asylum adjudicator [2] [4]. ABC and Reuters highlight that questions remain about the thoroughness of vetting both at initial evacuation in 2021 and later when asylum was approved in 2025 [3] [1].
4. Conflicting emphases and political framing in coverage
News outlets uniformly report the approval timing but differ in framing and emphasis. Reuters and BBC present the fact of approval and note government vetting claims [2] [4]. U.S. political figures and the Trump administration have framed the approval as a failure by prior administrations and announced reviews of Biden-era asylum/refugee cases; some outlets emphasize that the approval occurred under Trump, which critics say complicates a simple “Biden-era vetting failure” narrative [2] [5]. The Guardian and The Independent echo that the asylum grant occurred this year under Trump while reporting on the administration’s announced reviews [6] [7].
5. What the sources do not say — important lacunae
The assembled reporting does not provide a clear, named adjudicator (for example, “USCIS granted affirmative asylum” or “an immigration judge granted asylum in EOIR proceedings”) for the April 23, 2025, approval; public articles cite government files, law enforcement sources, and administration statements but do not reproduce the adjudicative paperwork or identify the specific office that issued the grant (available sources do not mention the specific agency or court that handled the asylum decision) [1] [2] [3].
6. How to interpret “approved” in press reporting — caution for readers
When outlets say an asylum claim was “granted,” they often rely on official summaries, law enforcement memos, or unnamed sources; that shorthand does not illuminate whether the grant followed standard affirmative USCIS channels, was the result of an immigration-court defensive ruling, or was an administrative grant linked to parole/resettlement programs. Given the reporting’s consistent omission of the adjudicating body, readers should treat “approved on April 23” as a documented outcome tied to federal records but not a full record of which agency or court signed the order [1] [2].
7. Next reporting steps and how to verify the adjudicator
To pinpoint which agency or court formally issued the asylum grant, journalists would need to obtain the adjudicative record: the USCIS approval notice, an EOIR immigration court order, or the DHS file referenced by Reuters. Current public articles reference a “federal law enforcement dossier” or unnamed administration officials but do not publish the adjudication notice itself, so direct verification requires access to those administrative documents [1] [2].
Summary: multiple outlets cite an April 23, 2025 asylum approval for Rahmanullah Lakanwal and attribute the timing to the Trump administration, but none of the reviewed reporting specifies the exact agency or court that issued the asylum decision; those particulars are not found in current reporting [1] [2] [3].