Tennessee taxpayers are on the hook for $1.9 million after a state university fired a professor who cheered conservative leader Charlie Kirk’s assassination on Facebook.
Story Snapshot
- The University of Tennessee approved a $1.9 million settlement with fired professor Tamar Shirinian over her Facebook post about Charlie Kirk’s murder.
- Shirinian claimed the university violated her First Amendment rights when it removed her and moved to fire her after the post.
- A federal judge ruled her comment was not “core political speech” and backed the university’s interest in responding to public outrage.
- The settlement does not return her to the classroom, but it does deliver a major cash payout funded by taxpayers.
Professor’s Post About Charlie Kirk Sparks Firestorm
Assistant professor Tamar Shirinian taught anthropology at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville when Charlie Kirk was assassinated on a college campus in 2025. After news of his murder, she went to her personal Facebook page and called Kirk a “disgusting psychopath” while reacting to his death. Her comment spread quickly after another user shared it, and angry reactions poured in from lawmakers, university officials, and residents who saw her words as celebrating a political murder and mocking a grieving family.
University of Tennessee leaders did not ignore the backlash. System President Randy Boyd announced an investigation on September 15, 2025, while Chancellor Donde Plowman placed Shirinian on administrative leave and began termination proceedings the same day. In a letter, Plowman called the post “gross misconduct” and said Shirinian’s words praised a gruesome killing on a campus similar to Tennessee’s and “callously demeaned” the pain of Kirk’s widow and children. The university framed the case as a basic standard of conduct issue, not a simple disagreement over politics or policy.
Federal Lawsuit Claims First Amendment Retaliation
On October 29, 2025, Shirinian filed a federal civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 against the University of Tennessee. She argued that school officials punished her for protected speech in her personal capacity and targeted her viewpoint because of its political content. Her lawyers said the Facebook remark was social media commentary, not classroom teaching or official university work, and that the First Amendment should shield her from state retaliation even if many found the words offensive or cruel. The lawsuit asked for damages and reinstatement to a tenure-track position.
A federal district judge did not fully accept her First Amendment theory. The court ruled that her Facebook post was not “core political speech” because it attacked Kirk as a person rather than his ideas and policies. The judge found that the University of Tennessee’s interest in addressing intense backlash and protecting campus operations outweighed her speech rights in this situation. That ruling denied her bid to halt the firing process and signaled how hard it is for public employees to win speech cases against universities when controversy threatens a school’s reputation.
$1.9 Million Settlement Without Reinstatement
Despite that ruling, the case did not go to a jury trial. In June 2026, the University of Tennessee System Board of Trustees’ Audit and Compliance Committee approved a tentative settlement to pay Shirinian $1.9 million. Reports say the deal is one of the largest among recent university payouts tied to faculty speech controversies, including other cases involving comments about Kirk’s death. Under the agreement, Shirinian will not return to her former job, and she will not be reinstated to the faculty or tenure track.
The University of Tennessee System Board of Trustees approved a settlement with former assistant professor Tamar Shirinian, agreeing to pay the fired faculty member $1.9 million. But Gov. Lee and state attorney general need to approve the settlement. https://t.co/o5VSdjAEDb
— Gene Bryant (@GeneBryant2) July 1, 2026
Shirinian has publicly said she is pleased with the outcome and that the settlement meets her legal goals. The deal still requires approval by the full Board of Trustees, the governor of Tennessee, and the state attorney general before it is final. Once those officials sign off, Tennessee taxpayers will cover the $1.9 million payment even though the court found the university’s response to her conduct legally justified. This tension between formal legal victory and large financial settlement raises hard questions about how universities, courts, and voters should handle extreme online speech by public employees.
Free Speech, Public Jobs, and Taxpayer Costs
This case fits a broader trend that should concern citizens who value both free speech and fiscal responsibility. A study of 210 professor First Amendment lawsuits from 1964 to 2014 found that public universities won more than 73 percent of the time in federal and state courts. Courts often apply the Supreme Court’s *Garcetti* doctrine, which says public employee speech tied to professional duties is not protected even when it happens outside job descriptions. Faculty often lose when judges see their comments as linked to their public role rather than private life.
At the same time, these disputes still produce large settlements and legal bills. In Tennessee, the university now faces nearly $2 million in costs to resolve a single professor’s Facebook post that cheered a political opponent’s assassination and mocked his family’s grief. For many conservatives, the case highlights three related problems: radical activists inside taxpayer-funded institutions, campus leaders who struggle to enforce basic standards without triggering lawsuits, and a legal system that frequently leaves citizens paying the price for other people’s extreme online behavior.
Sources:
washingtontimes.com, campus-speech.law.duke.edu, facebook.com, utdailybeacon.com, instagram.com, knoxnews.com, ala.org
