Mohamed Bailor Jalloh walked out of federal prison less than two years before he opened fire inside a classroom at Old Dominion University in Virginia, court documents show. The attack left one person dead and two others injured before ROTC students subdued and killed him.

The shooting has put a sharp spotlight on federal supervision practices for convicted terrorism-related offenders, as investigators piece together how Jalloh moved from released prisoner to active shooter in under 24 months.

Jalloh had previously been convicted of attempting to provide material support to the Islamic State. That conviction, and his subsequent release, is now at the center of scrutiny from lawmakers, law enforcement officials, and university communities asking how someone with that record was not more closely monitored.

Court records reviewed by the Associated Press show Jalloh was freed from federal custody and, at some point in the period that followed, apparently radicalized further or never truly stepped back from extremist ideology. The precise circumstances of his supervision after release, including whether he was on probation or had completed his sentence entirely, were not immediately clear from available documents.

What is clear is the outcome. A classroom. Gunfire. One person killed. Two wounded. The attack ended only when ROTC students in the building confronted Jalloh and overpowered him, fatally stopping the assault.

The fact that it was student soldiers who stopped the shooter, rather than trained law enforcement, raises its own set of questions about campus security response times and preparedness. Their quick action almost certainly prevented further casualties.

Old Dominion University, located in Norfolk, has not faced a major violent incident of this nature in recent memory. The campus community is now grappling with the aftermath while federal investigators work to establish a fuller timeline of Jalloh’s movements and communications leading up to the attack.

The FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force is involved in the investigation, which is standard procedure when an attacker has a prior terrorism-related conviction. Investigators will likely examine his digital communications, his social contacts after release, and whether anyone else had knowledge of his plans.

The case fits a pattern that counterterrorism analysts have flagged repeatedly. Federal prosecutions under the material support statute often result in sentences short enough that offenders re-enter society while still in their thirties or forties, with years ahead of them and, in some cases, ideology that incarceration failed to change. Post-release supervision programs vary in rigor, and critics argue the resources dedicated to monitoring former terrorism convicts have not kept pace with the volume of cases that accumulated during the late 2010s prosecution surge.

Congress has periodically examined the question of recidivism among terrorism-convicted offenders without arriving at durable policy solutions. The Old Dominion attack will almost certainly revive that debate on Capitol Hill.

For the university community, the policy questions offer cold comfort. Students who attended classes in that building on an ordinary Thursday are now witnesses to a killing. Faculty and staff are processing a violent episode that unfolded in a space designed for learning.

University officials have not yet released the name of the person killed in the attack. The two injured individuals were being treated for wounds whose severity had not been publicly confirmed as of the initial reporting.

The ROTC students who intervened have not been publicly identified. Military officials have also not formally commented on their actions, though the response drew immediate attention and will likely be the subject of a formal after-action review.

Jalloh’s prior conviction raised a question that federal law enforcement agencies will now have to answer directly: when someone with a terrorism conviction is released from custody, what standard of oversight is adequate, and who is responsible when that oversight fails.

The victims of Thursday’s shooting deserve a clear answer to that question. So does every student sitting in a classroom at a public university today.