What does it cost to speak out after Charlie Kirk’s death?
For some, it’s been their jobs. In just a matter of days, everyone from MSNBC analyst Matthew Dowd to an Office Depot worker have been shown the door as a result of what they’ve said — and more could follow. The fallout makes clear just how charged the atmosphere remains around the conservative activist’s life and death.
It isn’t just the corporate world: On Monday, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott weighed in after reports of a Texas Tech student being arrested for celebrating Kirk’s death at a memorial, bluntly warning critics to “f— around and find out.” He also confirmed that the person in question had been expelled and was no longer enrolled at the university.
But the focus on workplace monitoring of the reactions to Kirk’s murder got an even bigger spotlight on Monday, when Vice President J.D. Vance urged Americans to report anyone who shared negative views of Kirk in the wake of his death: “When you see someone celebrating Charlie’s murder, call them out. And hell, call their employer.”
Further complicating matters is Kirk’s own history with making controversial statements following acts of political violence. One example being widely shared are the remarks he made following the 2022 attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul, who was beaten with a hammer during a home invasion. Though Kirk called the incident “awful” and “not right,” he also questioned the decision to keep the assailant behind bars.
“And why is [Pelosi’s attacker] still in jail? Why has he not been bailed out?” Kirk said in a 2022 episode of his show. “By the way, if some amazing patriot out there in San Francisco or the Bay Area wants to really be a midterm hero, someone should go and bail this guy out.”
As the debate about what is and isn’t acceptable to say during this complex political moment continues to intensify, here’s a closer look at some of the employers now cracking down on their own.
MSNBC
The network wasted no time cutting ties with political analyst Matthew Dowd, who sparked a firestorm online after suggesting that Kirk’s death was linked to his history of inflammatory rhetoric — including once calling the Civil Rights Act a “huge mistake.”
“He was constantly pushing this sort of hate speech aimed at certain groups,” Dowd said on air as the incident unfolded, adding: “I always go back to: Hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions. … You can’t say these awful words and not expect awful actions to take place.”
The backlash was swift and loud, especially on social media, where critics accused Dowd of effectively blaming the victim. Dowd later issued an apology clarifying that he condemned political violence and never intended to suggest Kirk was responsible for the attack.
MSNBC moved quickly to distance itself from the controversy. Within a day of his remarks, network president Rebecca Kutler announced that Dowd had been let go, apologizing for his comments and reminding employees to “exercise caution” in how they discuss sensitive news events.
But Dowd didn’t leave quietly: Days after his firing, he blasted MSNBC for what he called bowing to a “Right Wing media mob.”
The Washington Post
MSNBC wasn’t the only media company to take action. At The Washington Post, columnist Karen Attiah says she was abruptly fired last week over a series of Bluesky posts about gun control and political violence. In one, she quoted Kirk’s past remark that Black women lack “brain processing power.”
Attiah defended her work in a Substack post Monday, saying: “As a columnist, I used my voice to defend freedom and democracy, challenge power and reflect on culture and politics with honesty and conviction. Now, I am the one being silenced — for doing my job.”
The Post pointed to its social media policy, which warns against posts that could call a journalist’s independence into question or undermine the paper’s credibility. But Attiah said editors went further, accusing her of “gross misconduct” and even endangering colleagues’ safety — charges she flatly rejects.
“They rushed to fire me without even a conversation,” she wrote, calling it “a hasty overreach” and “a violation of the very standards of journalistic fairness and rigor the Post claims to uphold.”
For Attiah, the fallout isn’t just personal. She warned her dismissal is part of a broader pattern: “What happened to me is part of a broader purge of Black voices from academia, business, government, and media — a historical pattern as dangerous as it is shameful — and tragic.”
American Airlines
U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said Saturday that an unnamed American Airlines pilot had been “grounded and removed from service” after allegedly mocking Charlie Kirk on social media.
The airline, headquartered in Fort Worth, later confirmed the move in a statement to The Dallas Morning News: “American Airlines condemns violence of any kind. Hate-related or hostile behavior runs contrary to our purpose, which is to care for people on life’s journey. Employees who promote such violence on social media were immediately removed from service.”
American Airlines isn’t alone. Delta and United have also suspended workers over similar posts, according to CNN. Duffy, meanwhile, doubled down on his criticism in a post on X, writing in part, “Any company responsible for the safety of the traveling public cannot tolerate that behavior.”
Office Depot
In Portage, Michigan, an Office Depot worker was fired after a viral video showed them refusing to print memorial posters for Kirk.
“We don’t print propaganda. It’s propaganda, I’m sorry. We don’t print that here,” the employee can be heard saying in the clip. One of the customers pushed back, explaining, “This is for a prayer tonight, for a prayer vigil.”
The exchange quickly spread online, sparking backlash from Kirk’s supporters, who accused the company of disrespecting his memory. Office Depot moved fast, launching an internal investigation before issuing a public apology. The company called the worker’s actions “completely unacceptable and insensitive,” and stressed that the decision to fire the employee was about maintaining its standards of customer service, not politics.
Microsoft
Microsoft weighed in Friday after reports surfaced that some of its employees had posted negative remarks about Kirk online.
“We’re aware that a small number of our employees have shared views about recent events,” the company said in a statement on X, adding that it was “reviewing each situation individually.”
The company stressed that celebrating violence against anyone is “unacceptable and does not align with our values.”
The statement followed a post from Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who had publicly called out Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella on X after an unverified claim circulated that employees at Blizzard — the video game company Microsoft owns — were “trashing” Kirk.
Nasdaq
Nasdaq, the company behind the New York–based stock exchange, said Friday it had fired an employee over social media posts about Kirk’s shooting, citing a violation of company policy. The company did not disclose what the employee wrote or who they were.
“Nasdaq has a zero-tolerance policy toward violence and any commentary that condones or celebrates violence,” the company said in a statement on X. “The employee in question has been terminated, effective immediately.”
State and federal responses
It isn’t just corporations disciplining employees over their comments about Kirk’s death — government agencies are taking action, too. The Texas Education Agency said Friday it’s investigating teachers after receiving at least 180 complaints about “reprehensible and inappropriate” posts about Kirk.
At the federal level, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered staff to identify service members who mocked or condoned the assassination so they can be punished. Social media users have joined in, flagging posts under the hashtag #RevolutionariesintheRanks.
Some of the flagged posts don’t celebrate Kirk’s killing explicitly, but they have still been deemed unfavorable — one read, “I don’t give a s— about Charlie Kirk.” Others went much further, like: “The hatred you spew is enough to get you what you deserve, pal.”
The administration’s involvement makes clear that the debate over speech in the wake of Kirk’s death is no longer confined to cultural spaces — it is now playing out within government institutions as well.
