Employees Across Industries Fired After Commenting On Charlie Kirk’s Murder
Most reactions to Charlie Kirk’s murder have centered around mourning and condemning political violence. But some responses have crossed the line — not just declining to mourn Kirk, but outright celebrating his death.
In those latter cases, some employers have taken action: dozens of people have been fired or disciplined for online posts tied to Kirk’s death. Meanwhile, a campaign has emerged to publicly identify those who mocked or applauded Kirk’s murder — with the goal of flagging their employers for termination.
Reactions: Critics say employers are acting too hastily and not differentiating between those actually celebrating murder and those criticizing some of Kirk’s opinions. Others point out that the firing campaign mirrors Turning Point USA’s own “Professor Watchlist,” which targeted left-leaning college professors and was criticized for inciting harassment.
WHO’S IMPACTED
Kirk, a right-wing Christian conservative known for his sharp rhetoric on issues like race, gender, and immigration, was undoubtedly a polarizing figure. At issue for employers: Where does criticism or disagreement with Kirk’s views in the aftermath of his murder cross a line? As news of his murder spread rapidly on social media, the commentary quickly followed.
Nasdaq said it fired an employee Friday over comments about Kirk that violated company policy. The University of Miami made a similar statement.
Delta Air Lines is reviewing internal cases that "went well beyond healthy, respectful debate” as employees are suspended. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy called for the firing of “American Airlines pilots who were caught celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk.”
From companies like Microsoft and Office Depot, to schools and inside the U.S. government — there are many similar probes into posts and comments made.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered a search of social media posts to identify military personnel who mocked or condoned Kirk’s killing, with the Pentagon suspending an Army colonel for reportedly celebrating Kirk's death.
In the media, MSNBC political analyst Matthew Dowd was let go after saying on air that “hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions.” He blamed a “Right Wing media mob” for his firing. Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah claimed in a Substack post that she was dismissed after her posts on Bluesky were deemed “gross misconduct” that endangered coworkers.
While Americans have a First Amendment right to free speech, that doesn’t protect them from workplace consequences in the private sector. A few states, like California, Louisiana, Minnesota, and Missouri, offer some protections for political speech while not at work, but most do not.
“A private company can generally fire an employee for public comments, even political ones, if those comments are deemed to harm the company's reputation, violate workplace policy or disrupt the business,” workplace attorney Marjorie Mesidor told CBS MoneyWatch.
In government, it’s trickier. The Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that it was constitutionally-protected speech for a government worker to react to the attempted assassination of President Reagan with, "If they go for him again, I hope they get him.” The Court ruled that such speech is protected by the First Amendment, unless it interferes with office functioning.
INTERNET TROLLS OR MORE?
A website called “Expose Charlie’s Murderers” said over the weekend it had received nearly 30,000 submissions of inflammatory posts about Kirk, adding it will publish “general location and job industry” of the posters. The site was offline by Monday. It resembled other moves on both the left and right that have doxxed people over their views on Israel and Gaza, during the #MeToo movement, and amid Black Lives Matter protests.
Vice President JD Vance said while guest-hosting The Charlie Kirk Show Monday that he believes the problem of extremism is being fueled by the left.
He cited a recent YouGov poll that found 24% of very liberal Americans say it’s acceptable to feel happy about a political opponent’s death — compared to 3% of very conservative respondents. A similar breakdown was seen when respondents were asked if political violence is sometimes justified.