Were there verified reports of celebrations after Charlie Kirk's death?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Multiple mainstream and specialty outlets reported instances of online posts and opinion pieces that celebrated or justified Charlie Kirk’s assassination, and right‑wing activists and authorities responded by identifying and disciplining hundreds of people for such posts (Reuters reports more than 600 affected) [1]. Independent sites and opinion outlets published explicit “celebration” pieces and social posts went viral; other voices condemned those reactions and framed them as isolated or morally wrong (Assigned Media, Catholic News Agency, Gizmodo, Reuters) [2] [3] [4] [1].
1. What the reporting documents: explicit online celebrations and crowd‑sourced naming campaigns
Within days of Kirk’s killing, journalists documented social‑media posts and web commentary that openly rejoiced in his death, and activists on the right compiled and circulated lists of people who had posted such messages. Gizmodo and Reuters reported that Laura Loomer and other far‑right actors vowed to “expose” or punish people they said had celebrated the assassination; an online group called the Charlie Kirk Data Foundation began crowdsourcing submissions of social posts said to criticize or celebrate Kirk’s death [4] [5] [1].
2. The scale: employers and officials acted — hundreds faced consequences
Reporting shows a cascade of real‑world consequences: employers, universities and government offices investigated or disciplined staff after viral posts. Reuters’ investigation found that government‑backed campaigns and influencer campaigns resulted in “firings, suspensions, investigations and other action against more than 600 people” in the weeks after the shooting [1]. Gizmodo and other outlets listed companies and institutions that took action in the aftermath [4].
3. Opinion and advocacy pieces that openly celebrated or justified the killing
Some outlets and writers published outright celebratory commentary. Assigned Media ran an opinion column that said “I’m celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk” and used explicit language praising his death; that piece and similar commentary were widely cited in subsequent coverage [2]. These items were part of the evidence journalists used to characterize a segment of online reaction as celebratory [4].
4. Counter‑narratives: condemnation from faith leaders and calls for restraint
Other prominent voices condemned celebrations and framed reactions differently. Catholic News Agency reported Cardinal Gerhard Müller calling Kirk “a martyr for Jesus Christ” and denouncing what he termed “satanic celebration” of the death [3]. Mainstream outlets also emphasized the broader societal shock and calls for dignity following an assassination [6].
5. Political dynamics: organized responses and partisan escalation
The aftermath became highly politicized. Reuters documented a coordinated effort—amplified by right‑wing influencers—to identify and pressure people who posted celebratory content, tagging government officials and pushing for punitive measures; the U.S. State Department revoked visas for six foreigners it said celebrated the assassination [1]. Vice President JD Vance urged listeners to press for consequences for those who celebrated, illustrating how the incident fed into political mobilization [1].
6. Limits of the record and what the sources do not say
Available sources document multiple online posts and opinion pieces celebrating Kirk’s death and the subsequent backlash; they do not establish that celebrations were widespread in the population at large, nor do they quantify what proportion of social conversation was celebratory versus condemnatory [1] [4] [2]. The provided reporting does not offer a comprehensive, independently audited count of every celebratory post; it focuses on widely circulated examples and the number of people disciplined [1] [4].
7. Why context matters: outrage, doxxing and the weaponization of social media
Journalists portrayed the sequence as two interlocked phenomena: some people publicly celebrated a political assassination online, and partisan actors immediately weaponized those posts to seek punishments and public shaming; Reuters and Gizmodo show how exposure campaigns and doxxing blended with institutional discipline [1] [4]. The coverage suggests the reaction itself became a political tool, not merely a moral argument about taste or legality [1] [4].
8. Bottom line for your question
Yes — verified reporting documents specific instances of celebratory posts and opinion pieces after Charlie Kirk’s killing, and outlets cite organized efforts that led to investigations and more than 600 people facing discipline [2] [4] [1]. At the same time, other prominent figures and outlets condemned such celebrations and framed them as morally unacceptable [3] [6]. Available sources do not provide a definitive measure of how widespread celebratory sentiment was beyond the documented examples and the number of people disciplined [1] [4].