Every month brings another reminder that the Biden-era immigration choices left dangerous gaps, and recent attacks tied to people who entered under those policies underscore why stricter vetting and enforcement are necessary.

This past month delivered another grim example: two National Guard members in Washington, D.C., were gunned down after being on duty less than 24 hours, ambushed by a man who crossed the country to commit the attack. That kind of cross-country violence raises hard questions about how certain people were allowed into the country and cleared to stay.

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro noted that “Afghanistan native Rahmanullah Lakanwal, 29, drove across the country” for the ambush, and reporting shows he arrived through Operation Allies Welcome. That program was launched in 2021 under President Joe Biden to shelter Afghans who assisted U.S. forces during the chaotic exit from Afghanistan.

Helping interpreters and allies is a defensible policy goal, but the basic public concern then was vetting. Questions about who was approved and how thoroughly they were screened never got satisfactory public answers, and that gap is now dangerous. When vetting fails, people who helped us can still pose threats if the checks are incomplete.

As a direct consequence, the United States has paused that program while officials study the breaks in vetting. The CIA put it plainly: “Effective immediately, processing of all immigration requests relating to Afghan nationals is stopped indefinitely pending further review of security and vetting protocols … The Trump Administration is also reviewing all asylum cases approved under the Biden Administration, which failed to vet these applicants on a massive scale.” That statement signals a serious reexamination is under way.

Available details show Lakanwal “worked with the CIA” and did other work for U.S. military efforts against the Taliban, but the public record still lacks clarity on how final clearance and asylum approval happened in 2024. Americans deserve to know what processes approved his entry and residence when so many questions remain about that vetting.

This keeps falling into a broader pattern from the Biden era: people arriving, and the public not getting clear explanations about who they are or how they were screened. That lack of transparency creates real worry about safety and national security, and it undermines trust in the system that is supposed to protect citizens.

Recent months also showed illegal immigrants involved in deadly crashes in California and Florida, where drivers permitted to operate commercial vehicles killed Americans. Those incidents exposed how porous border enforcement and post-entry checks can have tragic downstream effects when dangerous people gain access to jobs that put the public at risk.

In some cases state agencies issued commercial driver licenses with entries like “NO NAME” as the legal name, highlighting absurdities in the system that let unvetted individuals obtain credentials. Those failures make it harder to argue that everything was done carefully during the chaotic admissions of the prior administration.

Some will point out that these problems continued under the current administration or that some reapprovals happened recently. That is true, and it shows the repair job will take time and attention across agencies. Still, the buck stops at the basic question of why so many people were admitted without clear, documented vetting.

The larger point from a law-and-order perspective is plain: entering the country illegally is breaking the law, and anyone who bypasses legal channels is a risk to public order. We should welcome people who follow the legal process, not excuse those who ignore it and then demand that citizens absorb the consequences.

Legal immigration and assimilation are how immigrants succeed here, and enforcing the rules is the minimum requirement for a functioning society. When people cut lines and then receive work permits or licenses without proper verification, that undercuts both public safety and the fairness owed to lawful applicants.

The political defense from the left, that not every illegal entrant is violent, is technically true but misses the point. The issue is the systemwide failure to enforce established laws and vet dangerous applicants, not an argument about every individual case. Public policy should prevent avoidable risks by insisting on robust checks.

During the pandemic, many left-leaning officials enforced strict rules on the rights and livelihoods of citizens, yet they treated the same rule of law differently when it came to border enforcement. That inconsistency is a fairness problem and a security problem rolled into one.

We are now seeing the consequences of letting standards slip: Americans are getting shot, injured, and killed in incidents tied to weak vetting and loose admission policies. Two National Guardsmen, barely on duty, were shot in an attack linked to these failures, and that should be unacceptable to any leader who values citizen safety.

I say enough. The country needs practical, enforceable immigration standards, clear vetting protocols for those coming from conflict zones, and the political will to enforce laws so that public safety comes first.