Initially, Clemson University upheld freedom of speech, condemning a staff member’s comments regarding Charlie Kirk’s death. The institution declared its commitment to constitutional protections on social media. However, just three days later, one employee was terminated due to conservative pressure from the state capitol. The ensuing protest attracted attention from the White House, leading to two more firings.
The swift changes at South Carolina public universities underscore the mounting pressure on university leaders nationwide to regulate concerning remarks related to the assassination of conservative figures, leaving them in a difficult position.
The university could choose to disregard Republican backlash, uphold employees’ speech rights, and risk federal scrutiny, which has been known to threaten billion-dollar cuts to institutions like Harvard and others. Conversely, yielding to pressure could lead to what some academics perceive as a historic erosion of Campus Speech Rights.
A Campaign in rights is targeting those who support Kirk, as some conservatives advocate for the firing of Private Sector Employees and journalists whom they accuse of inciting violence. The stakes are particularly high within academia, where institutions are already under scrutiny for a perceived “woke” agenda and leftist ideologies.
According to sources familiar with private discussions, the White House coordinated a meeting with federal agencies on Monday to explore “funding options” for Clemson and other universities. However, specifics were not disclosed.
Lara Schwartz, an expert on constitutional law and campus speech, argues that the increasing desire to regulate speech on campuses violates the First Amendment, encompassing protests related to the Israeli Hamas war and commentary on Kirk’s death. Despite being distasteful, she noted that many remarks causing unrest are likely protected speech.
“This could potentially mark the end of free expression in the United States,” Schwartz stated. “It’s important not to view this merely as a social media dispute, but as a significant constitutional crisis.”
Government-wide Conservatives Target Clemson
Over the past weekend, Clemson became a focal point in a conflict between Kirk’s supporters and detractors. Republicans across various levels rushed to support the campus GOP club following social media posts where a campus employee mocked Kirk’s death. State lawmakers visited the campus, and demanded the employee’s dismissal.
A screenshot circulated by university Republicans showed an audio technology professor sharing a post on the day of the murder.
In response to Clemson’s statement defending free speech, Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee issued a succinct social media post reading, “Defund Clemson.” Lawmakers threatened funding cuts in light of the incident, including statements from President Donald Trump.
South Carolina Republican Nancy Mace, a gubernatorial candidate, wrote to the Education Department urging the withdrawal of federal funds from educational institutions that fail to swiftly terminate employees who “celebrate or justify political violence.”
Prior to an emergency meeting by the Clemson Board of Trustees on Monday, the state’s Republican Attorney General reassured university leaders that state law allowed for such firings. Alan Wilson stated that dismissed employees could challenge their terminations in civil court; however, Clemson and other institutions would not face charges under state law prohibiting dismissal based on political beliefs.
“The fear of legal repercussions should not deter state university presidents like those at Clemson from taking necessary actions against staff members making abhorrent and inflammatory comments on public platforms,” Wilson wrote.
Clemson announced on Tuesday that one employee had been fired before the board meeting, while the other two were rejected, both being teachers.
Several Universities Fire Staff Over Kirk’s Comments
Conservatives calling for terminations assert that praising or celebrating violence may incite further acts, venturing into speech territory unprotected by the Constitution. Attorney General Pam Bondy emphasized that rhetoric surrounding Kirk’s murder posed a threat of violence.
“For too long, we’ve seen the radical left normalize threats, endorse assassinations, and applaud political violence,” she stated. “That era has ended.”
Secretary of Education Linda McMahon urged educational institutions to clamp down on individuals celebrating violence during a video statement, attributing such sentiments to universities fostering “divisive ideologies.”
“I commend the institutions and leaders who swiftly condemned those crossing moral boundaries and held them accountable,” she remarked.
Numerous universities have terminated or suspended staff members over remarks concerning Kirk, including the University of Miami, the University of Tennessee, Auburn University, and the University of California, Los Angeles.
Others are conducting investigations into social media activity. Iowa’s Regent Committee has empowered one of the state’s public universities to take immediate actions, including terminations. President Shelly Bates described last week’s post as “aggressive, inappropriate, and entirely unacceptable.”
“We anticipate more from our institutional team members,” she stated.
Some university leaders are condemning extreme comments while striving to strike a balance, reaffirming their dedication to First Amendment principles. In Georgia, Columbus State University President Stuart Rayfield addressed that, although the professor’s posts were disappointing, faculty and students possess the right to express personal views under the First Amendment.
Leaders at the University of Missouri stated Wednesday that they uphold employees’ rights to voice their opinions as citizens, yet encouraged staff to “exercise these freedoms judiciously, particularly on social media.”
___
Associated Press Writer Alanna Durkin Richer contributed to this report.
___
Associated Press Education Compensation receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For more information, see the AP standards and the list of AP supporters and funded compensation areas.
Source: apnews.com