{"id":226905,"date":"2025-09-14T19:47:14","date_gmt":"2025-09-14T19:47:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/226905\/"},"modified":"2025-09-14T19:47:14","modified_gmt":"2025-09-14T19:47:14","slug":"how-much-freedom-of-speech-do-you-have-at-work-experts-weigh-in-after-charlie-kirks-death","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/226905\/","title":{"rendered":"How much freedom of speech do you have at work? Experts weigh in after Charlie Kirk’s death"},"content":{"rendered":"

NEW YORK (AP) \u2014 In the days following the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, numerous workers have been fired<\/a> for their comments on his death, among them MSNBC political analyst Matthew Dowd.<\/p>\n

Several conservative activists have sought to identify social media users whose posts about Kirk they viewed as offensive or celebratory, targeting everyone from journalists to teachers. Right-wing influencer Laura Loomer said she would try to ruin the professional aspirations of anyone who celebrated Kirk\u2019s death.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s far from the first time workers have lost their jobs over things they say publicly \u2014 including in social media posts. But the speed at which the firings have been happening raises questions about worker rights versus employer rights.<\/p>\n

In the U.S., laws can vary across states, but overall, there\u2019s very little legal protections for employees who are punished for speech made both in and out of private workplaces. <\/p>\n

\u201cMost people think they have a right to free speech\u2026but that doesn\u2019t necessarily apply in the workplace,\u201d said Vanessa Matsis-McCready, associate general counsel and vice president of HR Services for Engage PEO. \u201cMost employees in the private sector do not have any protections for that type of speech at work.\u201d<\/p>\n

Add to that the prevalence of social media, which has made it increasingly common to track employees\u2019 conduct outside of work and to dox people, or publish information about them online with the intent of harming or harassing them.<\/p>\n

Employers have a lot of leeway<\/p>\n

Protections for workers vary from one state to the next. For example, in New York, if an employee is participating in a weekend political protest, but not associating themselves with the organization that employs them, their employer cannot fire them for that activity when they return to work. But if that same employee is at a company event on a weekend and talks about their political viewpoints in a way that makes others feel unsafe or the target of discrimination or harassment, then they could face consequences at work, Matsis-McCready said.<\/p>\n

Most of the U.S. defaults to \u201cat-will\u201d employment law \u2014 which essentially means employers can choose to hire and fire as they see fit, including over employees\u2019 speech.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe First Amendment does not apply in private workplaces to protect employees\u2019 speech,\u201d said Andrew Kragie, an attorney who specializes in employment and labor law at Maynard Nexsen. \u201cIt actually does protect employers\u2019 right to make decisions about employees, based on employees\u2019 speech.\u201d<\/p>\n

Kragie said there are \u201cpockets of protection\u201d around the U.S. under various state laws, such as statutes that forbid punishing workers for their political views. But the interpretation of how that gets enforced changes, he notes, making the waters murky.<\/p>\n

Steven T. Collis, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin and faculty director of the school\u2019s Bech-Loughlin First Amendment Center, also points to some state laws that say employers can\u2019t fire their workers for \u201clegal off duty conduct.\u201d But there\u2019s often an exception for conduct seen as disruptive to an employer\u2019s business or reputation, which could be grounds to fire someone over public comments or social media posts.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn this scenario, if somebody feels like one of their employees has done something that suggests they are glorifying or celebrating a murder, an employer might still be able to fire them even with one of those laws on the books,\u201d Collis said.<\/p>\n

For public employees, which can range from school teachers and postal workers to elected officials, the process is a bit different. That\u2019s because the First Amendment plays a unique role when the government is the employer, Collis explains. The Supreme Court has ruled that if an employee is acting in a private capacity but speaking on a matter of public concern, they could be protected. Still, he noted that government employers can discipline a worker if they determine such conduct will interfere with the government\u2019s ability to do its job.<\/p>\n

Some in the public sector have already worked to restrict speech in the aftermath of Kirk\u2019s death. For instance, leaders at the Pentagon unveiled a \u201czero tolerance\u201d policy for any posts or comments from troops that make light of or celebrate the killing of Kirk.<\/p>\n

The policy, announced by the Pentagon\u2019s top spokesman Sean Parnell on social media Thursday<\/a>, came hours after numerous conservative military influencers and activists began forwarding posts they considered problematic to Parnell and his boss, defense secretary Pete Hegseth.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is unacceptable for military personnel and Department of War civilians to celebrate or mock the assassination of a fellow American,\u201d Parnell wrote Thursday.<\/p>\n

A surge of political debate<\/p>\n

The ubiquity of social media is making it easier than ever to share opinions about politics and major news events as they\u2019re unfolding. But posting on social media leaves a record, and in times of escalating political polarization, those declarations can be seen as damaging to the reputation of an individual or their employer. <\/p>\n

\u201cPeople don\u2019t realize when they\u2019re on social media, it is the town square,\u201d said Amy Dufrane, CEO of the Human Resource Certification Institute. \u201cThey\u2019re not having a private conversation with the neighbor over the fence. They\u2019re really broadcasting their views.\u201d<\/p>\n

Political debates are certainly not limited to social media and are increasingly making their way into the workplace as well.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe gamification of the way we communicate in the workplace, Slack and Teams, chat and all these things, they\u2019re very similar to how you might interact on Instagram or other social media, so I do think that makes it feel a little less formal and somebody might be more inclined to take to take a step and say, \u2018Oh, I can\u2019t believe this happened,\u2019\u201d Matsis-McCready said. <\/p>\n

Employers are not ready<\/p>\n

In the tense, divided climate of the U.S., many human resource professionals have expressed that they\u2019re unprepared to address politically charged discussions in the workplace, according to the Human Resource Certification Institute. But those conversations are going to happen, so employers need to set policies about what is acceptable or unacceptable workplace conduct, Dufrane said.<\/p>\n

\u201cHR has got to really drill down and make sure that they\u2019re super clear on their policies and practices and communicating to their employees on what are their responsibilities as an employee of the organization,\u201d Dufrane said. <\/p>\n

Many employers are reviewing their policies on political speech and providing training about what appropriate conduct looks like, both inside and outside the organization, she said. And the brutal nature of Kirk\u2019s killing may have led some of them to react more strongly in the days that followed his death. <\/p>\n

\u201cBecause of the violent nature of what some political discussion is now about, I think there is a real concern from employers that they want to keep the workplace safe and that they\u2019re being extra vigilant about anything that could be viewed as a threat, which is their duty,\u201d Matsis-McCreedy said.<\/p>\n

Employees can also be seen as ambassadors of a company\u2019s brand, and their political speech can dilute that brand and hurt its reputation, depending on what is being said and how it is being received. That is leading more companies to act on what employees are saying online, she said.<\/p>\n

\u201cSome of the individuals that had posted and their posts went viral, all of a sudden the phone lines of their employers were just nonstop calls complaining,\u201d Matsis-McCready said. <\/p>\n

Still, experts like Collis don\u2019t anticipate a significant change in how employers monitor their workers speech \u2014 noting that online activity has come under the spotlight for at least the last 15 years.<\/p>\n

\u201cEmployers are already and have been for a very long time, vetting employees based on what they\u2019re posting on social media,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

____<\/p>\n

Associated Press Staff Writer Konstantin Toropin in Washington contributed to this report. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"NEW YORK (AP) \u2014 In the days following the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, numerous workers…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":226906,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,3],"tags":[9600,122666,122667,119587,64,411,19719,413,1226,57,118,63,606,67722,120522,122668,50,6986,26562,25731,61,67,132,68,122669],"class_list":{"0":"post-226905","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-united-states","8":"category-us","9":"tag-activism","10":"tag-amy-dufrane","11":"tag-andrew-kragie","12":"tag-assassination-of-charlie-kirk","13":"tag-business","14":"tag-censorship","15":"tag-charlie-kirk","16":"tag-civil-rights","17":"tag-conservatism","18":"tag-general-news","19":"tag-human-rights","20":"tag-jobs-and-careers","21":"tag-labor","22":"tag-laura-loomer","23":"tag-matthew-dowd","24":"tag-maynard-nexsen","25":"tag-news","26":"tag-pete-hegseth","27":"tag-sean-parnell","28":"tag-u-s-department-of-defense","29":"tag-u-s-news","30":"tag-united-states","31":"tag-unitedstates","32":"tag-us","33":"tag-vanessa-matsis-mccready"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115204380824025417","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226905","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=226905"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226905\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/226906"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=226905"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=226905"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=226905"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}