When Tragedy Becomes the Catalyst: Rethinking Reactive Lawmaking in America

Iryna’s Law: A Case Study in Reactive Legislation

On October 3, 2025, North Carolina Governor Josh Stein signed House Bill 307—now known as Iryna’s Law—just six weeks after the brutal murder of 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska on Charlotte’s light rail. The suspect, a repeat violent offender with a history of mental health issues, had been released earlier that year on a misdemeanor charge without bond.  [1]

The law now mandates stricter bail protocols for violent offenders and expands mental health evaluations during pretrial decisions. It also controversially includes a provision to potentially resume executions in North Carolina, even by firing squad—a move Stein publicly condemned as “barbaric.”  [2]

The Pattern of Pain

America’s legislative history is littered with laws named after victims—each one a monument to lives lost and systems that failed:

• Amber Alert (1996) — After Amber Hagerman’s abduction

• Megan’s Law (1996) — After Megan Kanka’s murder

• Matthew Shepard & James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act (2009) — After two hate-fueled killings

• Elijah’s Law (2022) — After a fatal allergy reaction in preschool

• Iryna’s Law (2025) — After a fatal stabbing on public transit

These laws are reactive. They respond to tragedy with urgency, but rarely with vision. They offer justice after the fact, not protection before it.

The Cost of Waiting

Reactive laws are emotionally charged and politically palatable. They offer closure, signal accountability, and respond to public outcry. But they also reveal a systemic failure to anticipate and prevent harm. When lawmakers wait for tragedy to act, they gamble with lives.

Proactive legislation, by contrast, is quieter. It demands foresight, data, and often the political courage to confront uncomfortable truths before they explode. It means investing in prevention, not just punishment. It means listening to survivors, advocates, and experts—not just headlines.

What Proactive Looks Like

Imagine a system where:

• Bail decisions prioritize risk, not just ability to pay

• Mental health crises are addressed before they escalate

• Repeat offenders are flagged and monitored with care

• Survivor-informed legislation is reviewed and adopted across all 50 states

Proactive governance isn’t just possible—it’s essential. It requires a shift from reactive storytelling to preventative strategy. It asks leaders to see the warning signs not as isolated incidents, but as calls to action.

A Call to Governors: From Social Gathering to Policy Accelerator

Every year, America’s governors gather to discuss policy, shake hands, and share best practices. But too often, these gatherings are reactive responding to headlines, not anticipating them.

Take Iryna’s Law, signed in North Carolina just six weeks after Iryna Zarutska’s murder. It’s a vital reform—but only for North Carolina. In 49 other states, similar loopholes may still exist. And that means similar tragedies can still happen.

Imagine if this annual gathering became a policy accelerator for public safety:

• Governors commit to reviewing and adopting proven laws from other states.

• Survivor-led panels present proactive legislation before tragedy strikes.

• A shared database tracks which states have implemented key protections—and which haven’t

This isn’t just possible—it’s necessary. Because justice shouldn’t be local. It should be universal.

Advocacy Beyond the Headlines

It is imperative to honor victims not solely through legislation that commemorates their names but by establishing comprehensive systems designed to prevent others from encountering similar circumstances. This necessitates:

• Supporting survivor-led policy initiatives

• Demanding data-driven reforms before tragedy strikes

• Holding lawmakers accountable for inaction, not just reaction

Iryna’s Law is a step. But it should have been a safeguard—not a eulogy.