In the wake of rising tensions and heated discourse following the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, Florida officials are taking decisive steps to address what they describe as a surge in political threats and objectionable speech, particularly within the state’s education system. On September 22, 2025, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier and Education Commissioner Anastasios Kamoutsas jointly announced a series of measures aimed at curbing what they see as dangerous rhetoric and holding public employees accountable for their online conduct.
At a press conference in Orlando, Attorney General Uthmeier unveiled a new statewide portal, housed on the My Florida Legal website, designed to streamline the reporting of political threats. The portal, which accepts videos, images, and text messages, is intended to serve as a centralized hub for concerned citizens to flag potential dangers. "We’ve seen chatter online that looks concerning. And, you know, we’re going to take everything seriously until we know that it is not a legitimate threat. So that’s as much details I’ll provide right now," Uthmeier said, according to local news reports. He added, "But I know people at home have been looking for anybody, you know, on the other end, you know, willing to receive a tip or a concern. And so we believe we need a centralized portal."
The move comes against a backdrop of national scrutiny, as companies and state agencies across the country have responded to the fallout from Kirk’s killing by firing or disciplining employees for comments deemed offensive or celebratory of the violence. Florida, however, appears to be at the forefront of this trend, with officials emphasizing a zero-tolerance approach to speech that, in their view, crosses the line from protected expression into the realm of professional misconduct.
Education Commissioner Anastasios Kamoutsas, known for his tough stance on educator conduct, announced that the Florida Department of Education would actively investigate reports of objectionable teacher comments online. He specifically cited a case in Clay County, where a teacher’s social media post about Kirk’s death triggered hundreds of complaints and drew national attention. The teacher, identified as Kelly Brock-Sanchez, was suspended from her position at Ridgeview Elementary School and placed on administrative leave on September 11, 2025, pending a decision by the local School Board on further disciplinary action.
Kamoutsas detailed the findings of his office’s investigation, stating, "Based on the evidence and investigation, this morning, I found probable cause for four different charges." He enumerated the charges as "number one, gross immorality, number two, failure to protect the health, safety and welfare of students, number three, reduced effectiveness as an educator, and number four, failing to distinguish her personal views from that of a public educational institution." The commissioner made clear that he would be seeking the permanent revocation of Brock-Sanchez’s teaching license. "Holding educators accountable for speech that celebrates violence in schools is not a violation of free speech. It is a necessary step to uphold the standards of the teaching profession and the safety of our schools," Kamoutsas asserted at the press event, as reported by both local and national outlets.
One of the posts attributed to Brock-Sanchez, which circulated widely online, read: "This may not be the obituary we were all hoping to wake up to, but this is a close second for me." The post, referencing Kirk’s assassination, was cited by Kamoutsas and others as evidence of conduct unbecoming a public educator. The Clay County School District confirmed that Brock-Sanchez had been placed on leave while awaiting the outcome of the disciplinary process.
The case has sparked a heated debate over the boundaries of free speech for public employees, especially educators. First Amendment experts, including Clay Calvert, a nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute specializing in First Amendment law, have weighed in on the controversy. Calvert explained that while public employees retain some free speech rights, those rights are not absolute. "A public employee does have First Amendment rights, but so does the government in ensuring its employees' speech doesn't cause disruption to the services they provide," Calvert told USA Today Network-Florida. He noted that courts often apply a balancing test, considering whether the speech is related to a matter of public concern and whether it disrupts the government’s ability to function effectively.
In the case of teachers, Calvert said, school districts could argue that certain comments—especially those related to high-profile, emotionally charged incidents like Kirk’s death—might create discomfort among students or undermine the educator’s ability to perform their duties. "When you sign up to be a government employee, you do retain some First Amendment rights, but you don't have absolute ones," Calvert emphasized.
Kamoutsas’s announcement also followed a letter he sent to district superintendents earlier in September, warning that teachers could face termination or loss of certification for posting what he described as "despicable comments" about Kirk’s death. The Florida Department of Education’s professional practices office has indicated it will investigate each reported case, signaling a broader crackdown on what the state considers unacceptable conduct among educators.
Florida law stipulates that the final decision on whether to revoke a teaching license rests with the state’s Education Practices Commission. The commission last convened for hearings on September 12, 2025, and has not yet issued a ruling in Brock-Sanchez’s case. The process underscores the state’s commitment to due process, even as officials move swiftly to address the issue.
This approach reflects a broader, national pattern, as highlighted by the Florida Times-Union and the USA Today Network-Florida. Across the country, both public and private sector employers have faced calls to discipline or dismiss employees for comments about Kirk’s assassination, raising difficult questions about the limits of acceptable speech in the workplace. While some civil liberties advocates have expressed concern that such actions could chill free expression, others argue that institutions have a responsibility to maintain standards of professionalism and ensure the safety and well-being of those they serve.
Kamoutsas, for his part, has been unequivocal: "In Florida, we uphold the First Amendment and we foster civil discourse, as well as open dialogue in our schools, (but) this commitment does not extend to promoting or glorifying violence as a means of resolving disagreement." He has also pointed to previous disciplinary actions, such as the filing of a complaint against a Gainesville high school teacher accused of nominating a student "Most Likely to Become a Dictator," as evidence of the state’s resolve.
As Florida moves forward with its investigations and disciplinary proceedings, the state’s actions are likely to serve as a bellwether for how other jurisdictions handle the intersection of free speech, public employment, and professional standards in an era marked by political polarization and social media amplification. The outcome of the Brock-Sanchez case, in particular, will be closely watched by educators, legal experts, and advocates on all sides of the debate.
With the launch of the new reporting portal and a renewed focus on educator conduct, Florida’s leaders are making it clear that, in their view, the line between free speech and professional responsibility is not just a matter of legal theory—it’s a question with real-world consequences for schools, communities, and the broader public discourse.