In the days following the shocking murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk in Utah, the nation has found itself embroiled in a debate that stretches far beyond the circumstances of his death. Kirk, a polarizing figure and founder of Turning Point USA, was shot and killed earlier this month, igniting a firestorm of reactions that have ranged from profound grief and outrage to open celebration and fierce condemnation of both his life and legacy. The ripples of his passing have now reached the highest levels of American government, with calls for a federal holiday in his honor sparking an intense political and cultural battle.
Charlie Kirk’s death, which was recorded and circulated widely, has become a touchstone for the country’s ongoing struggles over race, free speech, and the boundaries of public commemoration. According to The Gleaner, Kirk’s supporters have rushed to defend him against what they see as misrepresentation and vilification. They argue that many of his most controversial remarks have been taken out of context or misquoted, pointing out that not all of his statements about race, immigration, or affirmative action were prejudicial. In particular, defenders note that claims of Kirk advocating violence against the LGBTQ community are false, and some of his critiques of diversity and equity policies resonate with certain segments of the public.
Yet, as The Gleaner also documents, Kirk’s public record is filled with statements that many found deeply offensive, particularly regarding African Americans and other marginalized groups. He once said that Joy Reid, Michelle Obama, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Ketanji Brown Jackson used affirmative action because they “do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously.” Kirk further joked about hypothetical inexperienced black pilots and expressed discomfort at the idea of a “black lesbian” surgeon, while also making derogatory comments about black women in customer service roles. His dismissiveness extended to important cultural milestones, as when he called Juneteenth—a holiday marking the end of slavery in the United States—unnecessary, and described Martin Luther King Jr. as “awful.” Kirk even went so far as to label the passage of the Civil Rights Act a “huge mistake,” claiming it had become “an anti-white weapon.”
Perhaps most inflammatory were Kirk’s repeated exaggerations and falsehoods about crime statistics involving African Americans, including claims that blacks are responsible for a disproportionate number of murders and that white people are more likely to be attacked “per capita” by blacks—assertions that are simply not supported by the facts. He also spread misinformation about high-profile victims of racial violence, such as Trayvon Martin and George Floyd, often blaming the victims or misrepresenting the circumstances of their deaths. Regarding Floyd, for example, Kirk insisted the man died of a drug overdose, despite autopsy reports indicating otherwise.
Nor was Kirk’s rhetoric limited to race. He frequently voiced misogynistic opinions, as when he told a female college student that “it was materially insane to think that one in five American women will be raped in their life” and dismissed such women as “lying.” He criticized birth control, saying it “creates very angry and bitter young ladies and young women,” and advocated for banning “third world immigration, legal or illegal.” His insensitivity extended to violence more broadly; Kirk once stated that it was “worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights,” and after a mass shooting involving children in Minneapolis, he tweeted, “These shootings are so common I hardly felt anything.” He even advocated for public executions, suggesting they be televised and sponsored by corporations, and recommended that children watch as “initiation.”
In one of his last public podcasts, Kirk addressed the concept of empathy, declaring, “I can’t stand the word empathy. I think empathy is a made-up new age term that does a lot of damage. Sympathy is a better word, because empathy means you are actually feeling what another person felt, and no one can feel what another person feels.” For many, it is this lack of empathy—this refusal to see the world through others’ eyes—that has come to define Kirk’s public persona, and now, in death, it has fueled a backlash that his supporters find difficult to accept. As one post on X (formerly Twitter) put it, “If you want people to have kind words when you pass, you should say kind words when you’re alive.” Pastor Howard-John Wesley summed up the sentiment: “I can abhor the violence that took your life, but I don’t have to celebrate how you chose to live.”
Against this backdrop, the question of how—or whether—to honor Kirk at the national level has become a lightning rod for controversy. According to The Independent and The Fashion Central, Republican lawmakers have moved quickly to push for recognition. The Senate passed a resolution declaring October 14, which would have been Kirk’s 32nd birthday, as a “National Day of Remembrance.” The House of Representatives followed suit with a similar resolution. Yet, as both outlets note, these actions are largely symbolic and do not carry the force of law. To create an official federal holiday, legislation must pass both chambers of Congress and receive the president’s signature—a process that, as history shows, is far from straightforward.
President Donald Trump’s position on the matter has only added to the confusion. Just months ago, Trump complained that “too many non-working holidays” were costing the country “billions of dollars” and suggested that the proliferation of holidays was undermining American productivity. On this year’s Juneteenth, he posted on Truth Social, “Too many non-working holidays in America. It is costing our Country $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS to keep all of these businesses closed. The workers don’t want it either! Soon we’ll end up having a holiday for every once working day of the year. It must change if we are going to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.” Yet, when asked on September 22 whether he would support a federal holiday for Kirk, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters, “I’m sure he wouldn’t oppose such a thing.”
This apparent contradiction has not gone unnoticed. Supporters of Kirk see the proposal as a fitting tribute to a man they believe was a powerful voice for conservative youth. Critics, however, argue that the move is politically motivated and unlikely to gain the bipartisan support necessary to become law. With only eleven federal holidays currently on the calendar, adding a twelfth would be a rare event, and the bar for such recognition remains high. The last successful addition was Juneteenth in 2021, signed into law by President Joe Biden—a holiday that Kirk himself dismissed and Trump has since criticized.
As the debate rages on, the story of Charlie Kirk’s life and death continues to spark intense emotions on all sides. For some, he was a truth-teller unafraid to challenge political correctness; for others, a symbol of the very divisions that plague American society. The question of how to remember him—and whether to enshrine his legacy in a federal holiday—remains far from settled. But one thing is clear: the conversation about Charlie Kirk is as much about the nation’s future as it is about its past.
