Lilly Smolenski ’27 Darian Mihalakis ’27
On September 10, 2025, conservative political activist Charlie Kirk was shot and killed while speaking at Utah Valley University for his youth mobilization nonprofit, Turning Point USA.
This event was the first stop of many for his “The American Comeback Tour.” Known for a focus on mobilizing young people to conservative causes, Kirk had planned a series of events at college campuses across the country. During the tour, he wanted to emphasize dialogue, exchange, and conversation amongst people with varying perspectives.
Kirk had a very strong media presence and was a close ally of President Donald Trump. He reportedly was an influential proponent of JD Vance’s vice presidential candidacy and was one of a few who stuck with Trump throughout numerous controversies. His strong opinions, including his support of abortion bans, Christian ideologies, and opposition to gun control and DEI, were publicized on a broad scale across the internet, making him a controversial figure in both political and social spheres. Although tolerant to other perspectives, he stood in firm opposition to LBGTQ rights, characterizing it as “woke ideology.” He would frequently debate more liberal influencers and had one scheduled with Hasan Piker, a left-wing activist.
While the situation is still under investigation, the suspect has been identified as 22-year-old Tyler Robinson. Text messages between Robinson and his roommate, who, according to court documents, was in a relationship with Robinson, have revealed more details about the alleged crime. The messages revealed that Robinson had been supposedly planning the murder for about a week before it occurred, and had expressed his reasoning for the crime, saying that he had “had enough of his hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.” He then proceeded to tell his roommate to “delete this exchange,” and for his roommate to not “talk to the media…don’t take any interviews or make any comments…stay silent.”
Authorities claim that Robinson shot Kirk from the roof of a nearby building, and then proceeded to flee into the woods next to the campus, change clothing, and leave the scene. He left behind his rifle, and when he went back to retrieve it shortly after, he noticed a patrol car near the gun’s location and abandoned the gun. The firearm, which he described as his “grandpa’s rifle,” was a key identifier when seeking suspects because of its unique traits and his family’s concern about its disappearance. Thirty-three hours after the assassination occurred, Robinson’s parents, working in tandem with a friend of theirs who was a sheriff’s deputy, convinced him to turn himself into the authorities. They suspected that their son was the murderer because Robinson looked a lot like the figure in various suspect images that had been released, and when they asked Robinson for a photo of the rifle, a lead the police were pursuing adamantly, he was unable to respond. Additionally, at the scene of the crime, Robinson’s DNA was found on the weapon.
According to BBC News, Robinson is now facing seven charges, including aggravated murder; felony discharge of a firearm; obstruction of justice— moving a firearm; obstruction of justice-disposing of clothing; witness tampering— telling a roommate to delete text messages; witness tampering— directing a roommate to stay quiet; and violent offense committed in the presence of a child. Furthermore, Utah County’s prosecution attorney, Jeff Gray, is seeking the death penalty.
This incident raises concerns about the influence of social media in today’s society, as well as how this can cause an inclination towards violence. It is well documented that Kirk’s opinions, as well as the opinions of those who disagreed with him, were frequently broadcast online, and social media had a significant role in fueling the assault, as the “hate” that Robinson referred to was based primarily on online information. Grace Christie ’27 discussed how social media can emphasize division in society, and how that notion plays into promoting aggression, stating, “Social media, adding to the polarity of our country, created hatred around him. Also, social media is a shield from empathy, because you’re behind a screen, and creates an environment where people feel more comfortable radicalizing ideals and violence.” Joe Shanahan, Director of Facilities, also echoed these sentiments, sharing, “The world is for sure a more dangerous place than it used to be. Social media adds its own wrinkles to how things are viewed and the information that is passed around. We have to stay ever vigilant.”
Aggressive rhetoric between politicians may have also partly led to the killing. Political commentators on both sides of the aisle risk further dividing the country and thus encouraging more violence with their violent warnings. Despite this, in an interview on Fox News after the killing, Trump refused to commit to unity. “How do we fix this country?” questioned host Ainsley Earhardt. “How do we come back together?” In response, Trump replied that he “couldn’t care less.”
Moreover, this event prompts reflection on other incidents of violence towards those exercising their right to freedom of speech, and overall attempted and actual harm regarding prominent political figures. As PBS put it in a clip tying the assasination towards a broader trend of political violence, “America’s list of victims of political violence is distressingly long and features figures from both the right and left.” Between the assassination attempt on Trump in the summer of 2024, the death of Charlie Kirk, and countless other incidents of violence geared towards groups because of their speech and beliefs such as Minnesota lawmaker Melissa Hortman, a concerning trend is rising. Just last May, The Academy Scholium ran a piece on the attempted murder of Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, another incident that points to the rise of extremist agitators. The murder of Kirk also emphasizes that not just one political party or group deals with issues of peace when expressing conflicting opinions, even as the Trump administration faces criticism for how it is treating popular online voices.
In just the past few months, Trump has filed a 15-billion-dollar defamation lawsuit against The New York Times and settled legally dubious lawsuits against major news broadcasters. In July, Stephen Colbert’s Late Show, which frequently criticized Trump, was canceled by CBS in a move critics argue was the result of pressure from the President. The killing has only served to embolden the administration’s crackdown against certain viewpoints.
An example of this escalation and how views of the incident have impacted lives is Jimmy Kimmel, another late-night TV host, who was pulled off the air by Disney after saying that the “MAGA gang” was “doing everything they can to score political points from [Kirk’s death].” As a result of these statements and their controversial and potentially insensitive nature, Disney, under pressure from the FCC chair, had to decide between pulling Kimmel off the air or having its broadcast license revoked in what many experts believe would be a constitutionally questionable maneuver. “Maybe it was an insensitive opinion,” remarked Arjun Kulkarni’27 on the incident, “but him expressing an opinion on public-air losing his job for that I think is a little bit hypocritical.”
Kirk leaves behind a legacy of a commitment to debate, discussion, and civil discourse. His slogan for his tour, even represented the day he was shot, was “If you disagree with me, come to the front.” He is survived by his wife and two children, and there have been waves of sympathy for his friends, family, and thousands of supporters. After his death, people from across the political spectrum have called for a recommitment to tolerance. “[Tolerance] is extremely important. You should be able to voice your opinion – we live in a country with free speech – with respect to others,” says Christie. “Everyone is entitled to an opinion… …the answer [to this situation] is tolerance and kindness and treating everyone with respect,” mentions Shanahan. In today’s hostile climate, America is faced with a decision. To choose acceptance and commitment to understanding, or to play further into the division we see through events like this. Time will tell what the conclusion is, and although Kirk is dead, his legacy and work will have a lasting impact on the nation.
