Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Against University of Mississippi Over Firing for Charlie Kirk Post

Lauren Stokes sued the university and chancellor over her termination for sharing a post criticizing the slain conservative activist.

Mar. 18, 2026 at 1:19am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A federal judge has dismissed Lauren Stokes' lawsuit against the University of Mississippi and Chancellor Glenn Boyce over her firing for sharing a social media post that called slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk a racist. The judge ruled that Boyce had a 'substantial interest in maintaining the efficient operation of the Plaintiff's department and the University as a whole, and given the level of disruption the Plaintiff's post caused the University, the Court finds the evidence weighs against the plaintiff.'

Why it matters

This case highlights the ongoing tensions around free speech and political expression on college campuses, as well as the challenges employees can face when criticizing public figures, even those who have died. It raises questions about the limits of First Amendment protections for university staff and the ability of administrators to discipline employees for social media posts.

The details

Stokes, an executive assistant at the university, was fired after she reshared an Instagram post on the day of Kirk's assassination that described him as a 'reimagined Klansman.' The post drew widespread backlash, leading to Stokes' placement on administrative leave and eventual termination. Stokes argued her firing violated her First Amendment rights, but the judge ruled that Boyce had a 'substantial interest' in maintaining the university's operations given the 'disruption' caused by Stokes' post.

  • On September 10, 2025, conservative activist Charlie Kirk was assassinated.
  • On the same day, Stokes reshared an Instagram post criticizing Kirk.
  • The next day, on September 11, 2025, Stokes was placed on administrative leave by Chancellor Boyce.
  • In November 2025, Boyce welcomed Kirk's widow and Vice President J.D. Vance to the campus for a conservative rally.
  • In February 2026, Stokes' lawsuit against the university was heard in federal court.
  • On March 16, 2026, the judge dismissed Stokes' lawsuit with prejudice.

The players

Lauren Stokes

An executive assistant at the University of Mississippi who was fired for sharing a social media post criticizing the late conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Glenn Boyce

The chancellor of the University of Mississippi who fired Stokes and was named in her lawsuit.

Charlie Kirk

A conservative activist who was assassinated on September 10, 2025, prompting the social media post that led to Stokes' firing.

Erika Kirk

The widow of Charlie Kirk, who was welcomed to the University of Mississippi campus by Chancellor Boyce for a conservative rally in November 2025.

J.D. Vance

The Vice President who was also welcomed to the University of Mississippi campus by Chancellor Boyce for the conservative rally in November 2025.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“I didn't realize how beloved Charlie Kirk was. Men older than me spat on me in public. People are still saying vitriolic things to me. I'm still suffering and humiliated.”

— Lauren Stokes (Mississippi Free Press)

“Having failed to show a violation of her constitutional rights or that the unlawfulness of the Defendant's conduct was 'clearly established at the time' of the alleged conduct, the Court finds the Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity and the Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against the Defendant in his individual capacity must be dismissed.”

— Judge Glen H. Davidson, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi (Mississippi Free Press)

What’s next

It is not clear whether Stokes will appeal the decision or not.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tensions around free speech and political expression on college campuses, as well as the challenges employees can face when criticizing public figures, even those who have died. It raises questions about the limits of First Amendment protections for university staff and the ability of administrators to discipline employees for social media posts.