After Charlie Kirk’s death, Clemson University initially championed free speech.
It condemned employees’ social media remarks that made light of Charlie Kirk’s death while affirming its commitment to constitutional protections.
However, this stance quickly reversed. Just three days later, under pressure from conservative elements in the Statehouse, the university dismissed one employee. As public outcry intensified and the White House took an interest, two more staff members were subsequently fired.
The rapid developments at the South Carolina public university underscore the significant pressure facing college leaders across the nation. They are increasingly compelled to police insensitive comments regarding the conservative activist’s assassination, leaving them with no straightforward solutions.
Universities face a stark choice: defy Republican backlash and defend employees’ speech rights, risking federal scrutiny and potential funding cuts like those at Harvard, or yield to pressure, risking what some scholars see as a historic erosion of campus speech rights.
A campaign among the right to punish those disparaging Kirk has cut across industries, with some conservatives calling for the firing of private sector employees, journalists and others they judge as promoting violence. But the stakes are especially high for colleges, which are already under intense scrutiny from an administration that has sought to reshape campuses it describes as “woke” and overrun by leftist thinking.
The White House coordinated a call with federal agencies Monday to discuss “funding options” at Clemson and other universities, according to a person with knowledge of the call who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private meeting. The White House did not provide details.
The federal government’s increasing appetite to dictate what can and can’t be said on campuses — from protests over the Israel-Hamas war to commentary on Kirk’s death — violates the First Amendment, said Lara Schwartz, an American University scholar on constitutional law and campus speech. Distasteful as they may be, she said, many comments provoking outrage are clearly protected speech.
“This could very much signal the end of free expression in the United States,” Schwartz said. “People should be reading this not as like a little social media battle, but as a full-on constitutional crisis.”
Over the weekend, Clemson became the epicenter in a battle between those who revered and those who reviled Kirk. Republicans at all levels rushed to support a campus GOP club that shared social media posts from campus employees mocking Kirk’s death. State lawmakers showed up on campus with signs demanding the employees’ firing.
One screenshot circulated by college Republicans showed a professor of audio technology reposted a message on X the day of the killing that said: “According to Kirk, empathy is a made-up new-age term, so keep the jokes coming. It’s what he would have wanted.”
In Congress, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee responded to Clemson’s statement defending free speech with a two-word social media post: “Defund Clemson.” State lawmakers threatened to cut funding, including one whose post was circulated by President Donald Trump.
South Carolina Republican Rep. Nancy Mace, who’s running for governor, sent a letter to the Education Department on Monday urging it to pull all federal funding from schools and universities that fail to swiftly terminate employees “who would celebrate or justify political violence.”
Ahead of an emergency meeting by Clemson’s governing board Monday, the state’s Republican attorney general sent a letter assuring leaders the firings would be permitted under state law. Alan Wilson said fired employees can challenge the dismissals in civil cases, but Clemson or other universities would not be prosecuted under a state law that forbids firings based on political opinions.
“Fear of criminal prosecution should not deter the President of a state university, such as Clemson, from taking the appropriate corrective action against university employees for such vile and incendiary comments on a public platform,” Wilson wrote.
One employee was fired prior to the meeting, and Clemson announced Tuesday it had dismissed two others, both faculty members.
Conservatives calling for the firings have said glorifying and celebrating violence also incites it, crossing into speech not protected by the Constitution. Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed to go after those whose speech threatens violence in the wake of Kirk’s killing.
“For far too long, we’ve watched the radical left normalize threats, call for assassinations and cheer on political violence,” she said. “That era is over.”
Education Secretary Linda McMahon on Wednesday encouraged schools and colleges to crack down on anyone celebrating the killing. In a video statement, she said such comments are the product of universities and schools that breed “divisive ideologies.”
“I commend the institutions and leaders who have acted swiftly to condemn and hold accountable those who have crossed this ethical line,” she said.
Several colleges have fired or suspended employees over comments on Kirk, including the University of Miami, the University of Tennessee, Auburn University and the University of California, Los Angeles.
Others have warned they are investigating social media posts. Iowa’s Board of Regents, for one, empowered the state’s public universities to take immediate action, including termination. President Sherry Bates said posts made last week were “offensive, inappropriate, and above all, unacceptable.”
“We expect more from those who work at our institutions,” she said.
Some university leaders have sought find a balance, condemning callous comments while pledging commitment to First Amendment principles. In Georgia, Columbus State University’s president, Stuart Rayfield, said a professor’s post that received attention online was regrettable but faculty and students are “entitled to their own personal views under the First Amendment.”
University of Missouri leaders on Wednesday said they respect the rights of employees to speak as citizens, but they encouraged staff “to use those freedoms responsibly, especially when engaging on social media.”
