California Teachers Face Discipline After Social Media Posts Celebrating Kirk Assassination Reveal Character Concerns

Last updated: October 7, 2025

At least 20 California K-12 teachers face disciplinary action after social media posts celebrating Charlie Kirk’s assassination and calling for political violence raised serious concerns about educator moral character. While media coverage frames the controversy as a First Amendment crisis, parents and community leaders emphasize the real issue: whether individuals who publicly celebrate murder and encourage violence possess the character required to be trusted with children’s education and development.

TL;DR

At least 20 California teachers face discipline after social media posts celebrated Charlie Kirk's September 2025 assassination.
Some teachers posted messages encouraging others to "be a Tyler Robinson" (Kirk's accused assassin) and previously called for violence against elected officials.
Media coverage frames the controversy as a First Amendment crisis, but parents emphasize the real concern is moral character.
Communities discovered educators entrusted with their children had celebrated murder and called for political violence.
At least 36 educators nationwide have been terminated, with Texas investigating 280 teachers and other states conducting similar reviews.
Parents and officials argue the issue isn't about silencing political views but about whether people who celebrate assassinations should teach children.
The cases will establish important precedents for professional conduct standards and the balance between free speech rights and community trust in education.

Teachers’ Posts Reveal Character, Not Political Views

At least 20 California K-12 teachers are facing disciplinary investigations after social media posts about Charlie Kirk’s September 10 assassination revealed troubling patterns of celebrating political violence and calling for harm against public figures, raising fundamental questions about educator character standards rather than the First Amendment crisis portrayed in media coverage.

The controversy erupted when parents and community members discovered that some educators entrusted with their children had posted messages celebrating Kirk’s murder, with one Clemson University staff member explicitly calling on others to “be a Tyler Robinson” – encouraging people to emulate Kirk’s accused assassin. The posts, ranging from mockery of the victim to explicit endorsements of political violence, sparked nationwide outrage focused not on free speech rights but on whether individuals displaying such moral callousness should be trusted with children’s education.

In California’s Pacheco Union School District, a teacher posted “You reap what you sow, Mr. Kirk” about the assassination while maintaining previous social media content showing a video of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene with the caption “Will someone please kill her?” The teacher was placed on paid leave and subsequently fired by the school board.

At Dry Creek Unified School District near Sacramento, a middle school teacher called Kirk “a piece of s—” among other derogatory comments on personal social media. District officials described the posts as “both unprofessional and concerning” and stated the comments “do not reflect the values, standards, or mission of the district.”

The Clemson University incidents proved even more alarming, with staff members posting calls to action encouraging violence and sharing statements describing the assassination as karmic justice. All three staff members were terminated within days of the posts being discovered.

CA teachers face discipline after social media posts celebrating Kirk assassination reveal character concerns—parents say the real issue isn't free speech, but whether educators who celebrate murder should be trusted with children #education #teacherworkforce #charactermatters Tweet Now Follow Learning Success

Parents Challenge Media’s Free Speech Narrative

While teachers unions and constitutional law professors framed the disciplinary actions as First Amendment violations, parents and community leaders rejected this characterization, focusing instead on the moral fitness question.

“We’ve got teachers celebrating an assassination in the United States of America,” said Tina Descovich, co-founder of Moms for Liberty. “It is the right and the responsibility of the state or the school district to make sure people with that moral compass are not taking care of our children during the day.”

Florida Education Commissioner Anastasios Kamoutsas emphasized the trust issue in a memo to superintendents: “An educator’s personal views that are made public may undermine the trust of the students and families that they serve. I will be conducting an investigation of every educator who engages in this vile, sanctionable behavior.”

Alabama Superintendent Eric Mackey acknowledged educators’ free speech rights but stressed their special responsibility: “Educators hold a special place in our society with the responsibility of educating children. I will not tolerate a small group of bad actors to diminish our calling or tarnish our profession.”

The California cases represent a fraction of a national pattern, with at least three dozen teachers, professors, and school staff members terminated or removed from positions across more than 12 states. Texas education officials are investigating at least 280 teachers, while Florida is examining cases involving at least eight educators.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott articulated the core concern: “We as a society, we as a state, must send a signal that celebrating the assassination of a free speech advocate is wrong in a civil society,” adding that schools and college campuses need a “course correction.”

Vice President JD Vance encouraged employers to take action against those celebrating Kirk’s death, framing it as a matter of basic moral standards rather than political disagreement.

Author Quote "

This controversy reveals a fundamental misunderstanding being perpetuated by media and unions. When teachers post messages encouraging political assassinations or celebrating murder, they’re not exercising protected political speech – they’re revealing character concerns that legitimately raise questions about their fitness to serve as role models for children.

Media and Unions Miss the Point

Despite the clear pattern of posts celebrating violence and murder, media coverage and teachers unions persistently framed the issue as a free speech crisis. David Goldberg, California Teachers Association president, claimed the disciplinary actions were “part of a larger attempt to bring culture wars into schools and silence teachers.”

UC Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky argued that “the First Amendment protects all speech” and warned of a “dangerous precedent,” while American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten condemned what she characterized as “encouraging the doxxing, censorship and firing of people for their opinions.”

This framing notably ignored that the posts in question weren’t political opinions but rather celebrations of murder and explicit calls for violence against public officials – content that raises legitimate questions about moral character regardless of First Amendment protections.

Florida Education Association President Andrew Spar acknowledged a key reality often overlooked in the free speech debate: “Social media is not a place where we talk with friends. It’s a place where we’re talking to a very broad public audience.”

Educational commentary emphasized the sacred trust issue: “Teachers, among other things, are hired to serve as role models. Misusing platforms for personal ideas is not an exercise of freedom but rather a breach of a sacred trust.”

California law prohibits employers from firing workers over political views, but explicitly allows restrictions on speech if it disrupts the workplace or undermines employee effectiveness. Florida law similarly permits discipline when an educator’s personal conduct “seriously reduces that person’s effectiveness as an employee.”

Key Takeaways:

"Be a Tyler Robinson" post: Clemson University staff member called on people to emulate Kirk's accused assassin, leading to immediate termination of three staff members who posted celebratory content about the political assassination

Prior violence advocacy: California Pacheco Union teacher who posted "You reap what you sow, Mr. Kirk" had previously shared video of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene with caption "Will someone please kill her?"

Nationwide pattern: At least 36 educators across 12+ states terminated or removed from positions, with Texas investigating 280 teachers and Florida examining 8 cases for posts celebrating assassination

Professional Standards in the Social Media Era

The California School Boards Association has not provided specific statewide guidance, noting that each district maintains its own teacher contracts and that personnel matters remain local issues. Typically, teachers suspected of workplace disruption through inappropriate speech face district investigations followed by potential school board disciplinary action.

Districts across the country face the challenge of balancing legitimate First Amendment protections with community trust and professional standards. When educators publicly celebrate assassinations or call for violence against public officials, they reveal character concerns that transcend political viewpoints and directly impact their fitness to serve as role models for children.

The cases highlight fundamental questions about professional conduct standards in education. When a teacher posts “be a Tyler Robinson” – encouraging others to commit political assassinations – or shares content calling for the murder of elected officials, these actions reveal moral character that legitimately concerns parents entrusting their children’s education to these individuals.

The controversy demonstrates the tension between constitutional free speech rights and the higher character standards communities expect from educators. While teachers possess First Amendment protections, parents and communities also have legitimate interests in ensuring that individuals with access to their children demonstrate basic respect for human life and reject political violence.

As California and other states process these cases, education leaders face critical decisions about how to maintain both constitutional protections and community trust. The resolution of these investigations will likely establish precedents for how districts address educator conduct that, while potentially protected speech, raises serious concerns about moral fitness for roles involving children.

The cases serve as a reminder that education is fundamentally a trust-based profession. When that trust is broken through public celebrations of violence and calls for harm against public figures, communities rightfully question whether such individuals possess the character required for the sacred responsibility of shaping young minds and modeling ethical behavior.

The nationwide pattern of educators celebrating Kirk’s assassination and calling for violence against public officials reveals not a First Amendment crisis, as media coverage suggests, but rather a character crisis that demands honest examination of professional standards and the moral requirements of educational roles.

Author Quote "

The issue parents are rightfully concerned about is straightforward: should people who publicly celebrate assassinations and call for violence against elected officials be entrusted with the education and moral development of children? This isn’t about free speech rights, which teachers possess – it’s about whether certain actions reveal moral character incompatible with educational roles.

The California cases force education leaders to confront an uncomfortable truth: the social media era has made visible what was previously hidden – the actual moral character and judgment of those we trust with our children. While First Amendment protections remain important, communities have legitimate interests in ensuring that educators model basic respect for human life and reject political violence. This isn’t about silencing dissent or punishing political views; it’s about maintaining the sacred trust that forms the foundation of education. When that trust is broken through celebrations of assassination and calls for violence, communities must decide whether constitutional protections should shield individuals from accountability for revealing deeply troubling moral character. The resolution of these cases will establish important precedents for professional conduct standards in an era where social media makes private opinions very public. For more insights on educational leadership challenges and professional standards in modern education, explore our All Access Program.