Being president of the United States is a job unlike any other. Wise leadership often goes unnoticed because the public never sees the disasters it prevented. Feckless leadership leaves a paper trail of avoidable tragedy — and nowhere does that trail run clearer than immigration.

The mass shooting over the weekend in Austin, Texas, offers a grim case study. Ndiaga Diagne opened fire at a popular bar near the University of Texas, killing two people and injuring 14 others before police killed him. The story of how he entered the country, stayed, and ultimately gained citizenship reads like a checklist of missed opportunities for enforcement and vetting.

A government that takes national security seriously screens more aggressively, removes violators faster, and treats immigration law as law — not as a set of suggestions.

Diagne, a 53-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen originally from Senegal, moved through an immigration system that repeatedly rewarded leniency and procedural box-checking over basic security judgment. As the U.S. hardens its defenses amid escalating conflict with Iran, the country should confront these shortcomings and adopt reforms that put Americans’ safety first.

A path to citizenship full of red flags

Diagne’s record raises questions that any serious system should have addressed long before he was granted citizenship.

He entered the United States on a B-2 tourist visa on March 13, 2000, during the Clinton administration. A year later, New York City police arrested him for illegal vending. That offense alone might not have warranted major action, but it marked the beginning of a pattern. Reports also suggest he overstayed his visa, since tourist visas for Senegalese citizens typically allow a stay of six months.

By 2006, during the George W. Bush administration, he adjusted his status to lawful permanent resident through marriage to a U.S. citizen. In April 2013 — during the Obama administration — he became a naturalized citizen, despite earlier signs of disregard for immigration rules and later arrests in New York between 2008 and 2016. Some of those matters remain sealed, and public reporting about the underlying conduct varies, but the volume alone should have triggered deeper scrutiny at every stage.

Reports also describe Diagne as emotionally disturbed. He reportedly applied for asylum years after becoming a citizen — a move that makes little sense on its face and raises further questions about stability, intent, and how carefully officials reviewed his file over time.

The attacker’s presentation added another disturbing layer. He wore a hoodie emblazoned with “Property of Allah” alongside an Iranian flag. Reports about images from his home also claim he kept pictures of Iranian leaders. Even if investigators ultimately draw a different conclusion about motive, the optics underscore the obvious point: When the system admits, legalizes, and naturalizes people with glaring warning signs, the country absorbs the risk.

None of this looks like a one-off error. It looks like a culture of permissiveness — a system that too often treats enforcement as optional and vetting as a formality.

RELATED: The great replacement, American style

piranka via iStock/Getty Images

We’ve seen this pattern before

Austin did not occur in a vacuum. The 2015 San Bernardino terrorist attack left 14 people dead and 22 injured at a holiday party. One perpetrator, Tashfeen Malik, entered the U.S. on a K-1 fiancé visa during the Obama administration. Investigators later said she pledged allegiance to ISIS online before the attack.

San Bernardino revealed the same basic weakness: immigration pathways that assume good faith, overlook warning signals, and fail to connect the dots until bodies lie on the ground.

Now place those lessons in the current context. Iran’s regime has built its influence by exporting terror through proxies such as Hezbollah and Hamas. As U.S. and Israeli strikes pressure Tehran, the regime’s remaining options include asymmetric retaliation. Domestic security officials should treat that risk seriously, especially after reports that the Biden-Harris administration released more than 700 Iranian nationals into the interior. Even if only a tiny fraction pose a threat, the consequences could be catastrophic.

America cannot afford “sleeper” operatives posing as refugees or asylum-seekers from terrorist-sponsoring regimes. A government that takes national security seriously screens more aggressively, removes violators faster, and treats immigration law as law — not as a set of suggestions.

Democrats have opposed border security, tougher deportations, and reforms such as the SAVE Act. They dress up their opposition as compassion. In practice, permissive policies expand the pool of illegal residents, increase pressure for amnesty, and reshape political incentives through reapportionment and election machinery. Americans pay the price. The dead in Austin and San Bernardino paid the price.

Americans should say, with one voice: No more.