Trump said the Zarutska killer was an illegal immigrant
In his State of the Union address, Trump described the killer of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska as an illegal immigrant who crossed an open border. This is false. The suspect, DeCarlos Brown Jr., is a US citizen.
What we know
In his 2026 State of the Union address, Trump cited the killing of Iryna Zarutska, a Ukrainian woman in North Carolina, as an example of the dangers of illegal immigration, describing the perpetrator as an illegal immigrant who had entered through an open border.
This was false. The suspect held in the case, DeCarlos Brown Jr., is a United States citizen. He did not cross the border illegally, and immigration status played no role in the crime.
Using a real crime to illustrate a political point about immigration, while misstating the citizenship of the suspect, was flagged by fact-checkers because it links a genuine tragedy to a false factual premise. The Guardian and others documented that the immigration framing did not match the facts of the case.
Court records and North Carolina law enforcement documents confirm DeCarlos Brown Jr.'s citizenship status and criminal history, which included prior arrests unrelated to immigration. The Zarutska killing, which occurred on a Charlotte light rail train and was captured on surveillance video, drew wide public attention because of its violence and because Zarutska had fled the war in Ukraine before her death, which made the case an emotional touchstone in unrelated debates about immigration policy. Times Now and other outlets that reviewed the case documentation confirmed that no immigration charge, detainer, or border-crossing record exists for the suspect, directly contradicting the description given in the State of the Union address.
Fact-checkers flag this type of error as particularly significant because it does not merely misstate a statistic, it attaches a false biographical detail to a real victim and a real defendant in an active criminal case, which can shape public perception of the case itself as well as the broader policy debate it was invoked to support. Multiple news organizations, including the Guardian's dedicated fact-check of the speech, published corrections making clear that citizenship and immigration status played no role in the crime as documented by prosecutors, separate from any question about the appropriate criminal charges or sentence in the underlying case. Advocacy groups on multiple sides of the immigration debate have criticized the use of inaccurate case details in political speeches, noting that whatever position one holds on immigration policy, using a false citizenship claim about a real defendant undermines the credibility of the broader argument being made and can be corrected without changing the underlying policy debate about border security. North Carolina prosecutors pursuing the case have proceeded under standard state and federal criminal statutes rather than any immigration-related charge, which is consistent with the documented fact that the defendant's citizenship removed immigration law from being a relevant factor in how the case was charged or prosecuted. Court filings in the case remain part of the public record for anyone seeking verification.
Common claims
- The killer was an illegal immigrant.Not supported
- He crossed an open border.Not supported