On Sept.10, Charlie Kirk was shot and killed during an event at Utah Valley University. A right-wing activist and founder of conservative youth organization Turning Point USA, Kirk rose to prominence as a strong ally of President Donald Trump. Kirk became known for his conservative positions on immigration, gun rights and higher education.
In the wake of the shooting, students at Hopkins joined the conversation of how to deal with political violence. Despite Kirk’s polarizing views, many students expressed a distaste for the assassination, emphasizing morality and the broader consequences of political violence.
In an email to The News-Letter, senior Arusa Malik reflected on the dangers of condoning political violence, regardless of one’s ideology.
“While many disagreed with Kirk’s ideas, he had every right to engage respectfully in campus discourse,” she wrote. “The fact that a bullet was used to silence him is an assault on both the First Amendment and free exchange of ideas that universities are meant to foster.”
Further, Malik warned that Kirk’s assassination could have ripple effects on higher education by discouraging students from engaging with political questions. She explained that Hopkins must condemn violence while also promoting free speech to foster exchange.
“I’m concerned this, coupled with an increase of gun violence in schools and ongoing instances of political violence, will create a ‘chilling’ effect on campuses across the nation. We risk losing opportunities for students to debate important issues out of fear,” Malik wrote. “Hopkins needs to affirm its commitment to open dialogue while condemning violence on campuses, and beyond.”
Other students noted the complicated balance between condemning violence and grappling with Kirk’s rhetoric, which they deemed harmful. For them, discussion was not as simple as remembering Kirk as a victim of political violence but also required recognizing the damage that his platform inflicted on marginalized communities.
In an email to The News-Letter, freshman Abigail McKenna expressed this tension directly. She emphasized that while she did not support violence, she found it difficult to mourn Kirk.
“To be clear, I do not condone gun violence and I do not think Kirk in any way deserved to die, especially in such a brutal manner. [...] However, I am not shedding any tears and I find it concerning that people are demanding ‘empathy’ for a man who actively ignored the genocide of Palestinians that is being actively perpetrated by Israel,” McKenna wrote. “I have not seen the video of Kirk being shot and I absolutely do not wish to see it. What I have seen, though, are endless videos of bombings; of wounded children being dragged out of rubble; of people screaming for their loved ones; of bodies so emaciated you could count the bones. Where was the empathy for those people?”
McKenna emphasized that Kirk’s death should not only spark discussion about empathy but also highlight the need to address the systemic issue of gun violence in the U.S. She explained that the tragedy, though devastating, should serve as an opportunity for change.
“Hopefully, this might serve as a wake-up call that things need to change. The amount of gun-related deaths that occur in the United States is absolutely heartbreaking and policymakers need to respond to that beyond just thoughts and prayers,” she wrote. “We need to make real, systemic change if we want to see any improvement. I sincerely hope Hopkins as an institution and as a community can contribute to that improvement.”
Student groups at Hopkins have also expressed strong reactions to the incident, underscoring how the assassination’s effects progressed beyond individual students and into organized campus life. For many, the event sparked questions about the boundaries of discourse.
JHU College Republicans issued a statement condemning the assassination and framing it as part of a broader trend of left-wing political violence in an email to The News-Letter. Their response highlighted both their concern over the attack and their belief that the political left has increasingly resorted to violence rather than conversation in the face of ideological disagreement.
“The news of Mr. Charlie Kirk’s assassination is both deeply upsetting and profoundly disturbing. [...] For years, we have been warned — by college professors and pundits — of violence lurking on the political right. In reality, political violence is increasingly a hallmark of a militantly intolerant political Left,” they wrote. “The real threat to our democracy comes not from those who would debate in the marketplace of ideas, but from those who would rather burn the market down.”
Hopkins Democrats also issued a statement regarding the assassination. In an email to The News-Letter, the organization emphasized its disapproval of the growing polarization in the United States and condemned the use of gun violence.
“I and the rest of our members are committed to fighting back against the rising political polarization in our country in order to create productive conversation and an opportunity to come to constructive solutions. In that regard, we wholly condemn the use of violence as a response to political dialogue,“ they wrote. “The events that transpired have shown the country that gun violence spares no one and only leaves devastation behind for the victims’ loved ones. We hope to see more focus from those in power and in the political sphere on public safety and the topic of gun violence in the coming months to prevent tragedies such as these in the future.“
Similar to McKenna, senior Enzo Larralde pointed to the broader implications of the shooting. He noted that the assassination highlighted the extremism that has characterized society in an interview with The News-Letter.
“I think it’s very telling about how our society is in extremist settings, and, on top of that as well, I think that there is a lot of irony in the fact that someone who was known for advocating for gun rights [...] died of a shooting,” Larralde said.
Buse Koldas and Myra Saeed contributed to the reporting of this article.
