The reactions to the various opinions about Kirk have sparked a freedom of speech debate.
Following Charlie Kirk’s assassination, a wave of terminations and disciplinary actions occurred against employees for their social media comments.
The firings have ignited a debate over First Amendment rights, particularly for public versus private employees in an at-will state like Florida.
First Amendment experts say the legality of firing public employees for their speech must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Charlie Kirk’s assassination sparked grief among Florida officials and triggered a wave of firings and public shaming of employees—both public and private—over social media posts, some of which allegedly celebrated his death.
Included are teachers, nurses, public workers and even other elected officials. An employee was fired from the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, and a tenured faculty member at Florida Atlantic University was placed on administrative leave pending an investigation, for example.
Some First Amendment experts have called his phenomenon an effect of “cancel culture,” and that it is escalating nationwide through the emotional reaction to Kirk’s violent death. The 31-year-old conservative activist and co-founder of Turning Point USA was fatally shot during a 3,000-person outdoor event at Utah Valley University Sept. 10.
It holds true as well in Florida, a state known as a Republican stronghold and for close ties to President Donald Trump, who lives in Palm Beach. And the controversy has been a lesson that just because people can say something doesn’t mean they should.
More: Multiple people lose jobs after posts, comments about Charlie Kirk assassination
The reactions to the various opinions about Kirk have sparked a freedom of speech debate. More specifically, does the firing of employees across Florida for social media comments impinge on free speech rights?
It depends, First Amendment experts say.
Public employees do have some First Amendment rights, but each situation must be looked at in a case-by-case basis. The government also has the interest for an employee in its workplace to fulfill its mission, said Lyrissa Lidsky, a First Amendment law professor at the University of Florida Levin College of Law.
Lidsky said one reason why the conversation about free speech and “cancel culture” is so dynamic after Kirk’s death is partly because Kirk himself was an advocate for First Amendment rights. She said there is arguably a difference between speech that opposes Kirk’s viewpoint, which can be protected, versus speech that celebrates an assassination.
“Calling for somebody to be disciplined because they don’t agree with what he stood for, that’s protected free speech,” Lidsky said.
Can you get fired for saying what you think?
Although First Amendment rights are expansive and can be applied in multiple contexts, including social media posts, free speech rights may not fully extend in protecting one’s employment. Florida is an at-will employment state, meaning an employer can terminate someone for any reason at any time, as long as the reason doesn’t fall under a protected status, such as age, race or sex.
Nonetheless, Miami employment law-attorney Susan Norton said she expects lawsuits to result from many of the firings across the Sunshine State. Even so, she said private employees will struggle to form an argument, since employers have more leeway in firing a private employee for speech.
Public employees can argue First Amendment rights, but in a university context they’d have to battle a social media policy and other policies on conduct that may weaken their case, Norton said.
“Usually what happens is, some other employee will bring it to the attention of management,” Norton said. “If there’s any other person that can see your account, it’s still a publication.”
What do First Amendment experts say?
Lidsky explained that one question to answer in firing cases is whether the speech affected workplace efficiency. This is a question applied in federal courts, who have determined that although public employees don’t have absolute free speech rights, they do have some.
That’s why Lidsky said it’s important to consider where the employee works, in what role and what the comments they posted said.
Another expert, Clay Calvert, said firings will need to be reviewed case-by-case. Calvert, a nonresident senior fellow of the American Enterprise Institute, focuses on First Amendment law. He told the USA TODAY NETWORK – Florida that some speech rights exist for matters of public concern, which Kirk’s assassination would fall under.
If a public employee is speaking pursuant to job duties, you generally don’t have any First Amendment rights, Calvert said. But speaking on a matter of public concern then raises the question of whether the employer has an interest to effectively and efficiently deliver services to the public.
That means that in an educational context, a public school teacher would be delivering “educational services,” and a student uncomfortable in a classroom because of what the teacher posted online could potentially cause the court to rule in favor of the school district a teacher works for.
“People have a right to express their viewpoints and to criticize Kirk’s views,” Calvert said. “If you’re criticizing Kirk’s views or his opinions on the issues, what they were, that’s very different than saying that his death was a good thing.”
Calvert said the nation has become so polarized that he sees a larger problem with the inability to have a rational debate. He noted that some people often consider hate speech to be violence.
“I think that’s wrong. Speech is speech.” Calvert said. “There’s a difference between speaking words that may offend people, that may harm them emotionally, and then actually engaging in physical conduct.”
Florida leaders, lawmakers condemn ‘despicable comments’
On Sept. 16, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who was attorney general in Florida 2011-19, posted on X that calling for “someone’s murder” isn’t free speech and instead is a punishable crime, and “every single threat will be met with the full force of the law.”
“Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime,” Bondi posted. “Free speech protects ideas, debate, even dissent but it does NOT and will NEVER protect violence.”
In response to her comments, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression said that the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear even the most “deeply offensive ideas” are protected so long as they don’t cross into a true threat or incitement.
“You can’t surgically remove ‘hate’ from public debate without also cutting away core political speech,” an email from the national free speech group read.
Gov. Ron DeSantis backed Florida Education Commissioner Anastasios Kamoutsas for condemning teachers who post critical comments on social media about Kirk, a 31-year-old activist known for mobilizing young conservatives to get involved in politics through his organization Turning Point USA.
The commissioner said teachers will be subject to investigation if found to engage in “vile, sanctionable behavior” through posting “despicable comments” about Kirk’s assassination on their social media accounts.
“Although educators have First Amendment rights, these rights do not extend without limit into their professional duties,” Kamoutsas wrote in a letter addressed to school superintendents Sept. 11.
Condemnations from Florida officials haven’t only extended to teachers. U.S. Rep. Randy Fine wrote on X Sept. 15 that “anyone who received money from the government and celebrates Charlie Kirk’s death will be out of a job.”
On X, Fine responded to a comment on one of his posts showing screenshots of comments on Kirk’s death attributed to an HCA Florida Trinity Hospital nurse. Fine said he reported it to the hospital.
And Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier posted on Sept. 11 a screenshot from a South Florida city councilmember’s Facebook page, saying that the elected official should resign if the post was “legitimate.”