Immigration Services Pause Asylum Decisions Following National Guard Shooting
In a swift and significant response to a tragic shooting in Washington, D.C., U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has suspended all asylum decisions until further notice. This decision, announced by USCIS Director Joseph B. Edlow on Friday, comes after an Afghan national was charged with shooting two National Guard members, resulting in the death of 20-year-old Sarah Beckstrom of West Virginia. The director emphasized that this pause will remain in effect “until we can ensure that every alien is vetted and screened to the maximum degree possible,” underscoring that “the safety of the American people always comes first.” This move represents part of a broader immigration policy shift that has emerged in the wake of the shooting, with various federal agencies implementing immediate changes to vetting procedures.
The suspension of asylum decisions is not occurring in isolation but rather as part of a comprehensive review of immigration protocols. Edlow has ordered “a full scale, rigorous reexamination of every Green Card for every alien from every country of concern,” with particular attention being paid to Afghanistan. The Department of Homeland Security confirmed it has already halted all immigration requests specifically from Afghanistan and has begun reviewing asylum cases approved during the Biden administration. Meanwhile, the State Department announced an immediate pause on visa issuance for individuals traveling on Afghan passports, stating they are “taking all necessary steps to protect U.S. national security and public safety.” These measures reflect a rapid governmental response to address potential security concerns within the immigration system.
The shooting that triggered these policy changes occurred on Wednesday in the nation’s capital, leaving one National Guard member dead and another critically injured. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, succumbed to her injuries, while 24-year-old Andrew Wolfe remains in critical condition. The alleged shooter, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national, now faces multiple serious charges, including first-degree murder and two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed. Attorney General Pam Bondi has indicated that the Justice Department intends to pursue the death penalty in this case. The attack has not only resulted in a tragic loss of life but has also prompted immediate and far-reaching changes to immigration policy and vetting procedures.
Lakanwal’s immigration history has become a focal point of attention in the aftermath of the shooting. He entered the United States legally in 2021 under humanitarian parole as part of the Biden administration’s Operation Allies Welcome, a program implemented following the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. According to U.S. officials, Lakanwal underwent vetting by the CIA in Afghanistan related to his work with the agency and was subjected to additional screening during his asylum application process in the U.S. A senior U.S. official reported that he was “clean on all checks” during his background investigation. His asylum application was subsequently approved earlier this year under the Trump administration. This case highlights the complexities of the vetting process for immigrants, particularly those from conflict zones.
The shooting and resulting policy changes have emerged against the backdrop of President Trump’s broader immigration agenda. Just prior to the incident, the president had vowed to halt migration from what he termed “Third World countries” and pledged to reverse admissions policies implemented during the Biden administration. The USCIS has now implemented new national security measures to be considered while vetting immigrants from countries deemed “high risk.” These developments suggest a significant shift in immigration policy that extends beyond the immediate response to the Washington, D.C., shooting. The intersection of national security concerns and immigration policy has once again moved to the forefront of political and public discourse.
It’s worth noting that a Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General report released in June found “no systemic failures” in the vetting of Afghan refugees or in subsequent immigration pathways. This finding presents an interesting counterpoint to the current policy changes being implemented across multiple federal agencies. As investigations into the shooting continue and policy changes take effect, questions remain about the balance between national security priorities and humanitarian obligations toward refugees and asylum seekers. The pause in asylum decisions represents a moment of recalibration in U.S. immigration policy, with officials seeking to strengthen vetting procedures while addressing public safety concerns. The full impact of these changes on both national security and those seeking refuge in the United States remains to be seen in the coming months.
