Free speech Fight get away as pentagon policies on Charlie Kirk Assassination

Those who reject the celebrations of the murder of Charlie Kirk as an harmless freedom of expression may have forgotten that the repression of the Pentagon against extremism began in 2021 after the riot of Capitol of January 6.

That year, the then defense department, which was renamed from the Ministry of War under the Trump administration, rewritten its standards for “extremism” in the ranks, clearly indicating that even to love or retweet certain content could cause discipline. At the time, the initiative largely targeted right extremism.

Now, the leaders of the Pentagon once again traveled social media – this time, suspend the officers who seem to encourage the political assassination that has shaken the country over the past six days.

“It is unacceptable that military staff and civilians of the Ministry of War celebrate or make fun of the assassination of an American colleague. The Ministry of War has no tolerance,” said Sean Parnell, spokesperson for Pentagon and senior advisor, Sean Parnell, spokesperson for Pentagon, declared in a job on X.

Pentagon leaders once again traveled social media – this time by suspending officers who seem to encourage the political assassination that has shaken the country in recent days. (istock)

“The hunting and pursuit of the military for their individual political convictions is dangerous and not American,” said representative Jason Crow, D-Colo., A former army ranger, warned X in response to the directive.

In 2021, after several members of the service were involved in the riot of the Capitol, the defense secretary of the time, Lloyd Austin, ordered a “stand-down” across the department and created a working group on extremist activities. Its recommendations have led to changes in the Code of the War Department (Dodi 1325.06), which officially defined “extremist activities”, such as the defense of violence, terrorism or the reversal of the American government.

The Pentagon appeals to the military who mock or celebrate the death of Charlie Kirk. (David Ryder / Reuters)

The Pentagon calls Charlie Kirk publishes “domestic terrorism”; DEM warns that discipline is “non -American”

For the first time, the Pentagon explicitly declared that social media activity – including tastes or sharing – could be treated as an approval of extremism and motifs of discipline. The code also standardized recruitment and recruitment screening issues on extremist links and issued new warnings to the members of the service that came out on the risks of extremist recruitment.

At the end of 2021, less than 100 members of the service had been found in violation of new standards.

In 2021, after several members of the service were involved in the riot of the Capitol, the defense secretary of the time, Lloyd Austin, ordered a “stand-down” across the department and created a working group on extremist activities. (Evelyn Hockstein / Reuters)

An update in June 2025 left most of these intact rules, reaffirming that the taste or sharing of extremist content could be punished if it imposed approval. But he brought a notable change: delete “gender identity” from a list of protected categories in the section prohibiting the advocacy of generalized illegal discrimination. The 2021 version had prohibited discrimination based on “sex (including pregnancy), gender identity or sexual orientation”.

Other agencies take even more aggressive measures. The State Department has announced that it would revoke the visas of foreigners who celebrate the death of Kirk, while the prosecutor General Pam Bondi said that the Ministry of Justice will pursue cases against persons engaged in hate speeches.

Jay Leno calls Charlie Kirk assassinates the “death of freedom of expression”

Critics warn that the wave of layoffs and suspensions – through the Pentagon, other federal agencies and even private industry – risks reducing calls for violence to punish those who simply criticize Kirk or who do not cry public.

“The hunting and pursuit of the military for their individual political convictions is dangerous and not American,” said representative Jason Crow, D-Colo., A former army ranger, warned X in response to the directive. (Tom Williams / CQ-Roll Call, included via Getty Images)

“Government employees, including military staff, do not give up their rights to the first amendment when they take the job,” Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy at Fox News Digital, told Fox News. “The soldiers have a room for maneuver to impose a discipline for speech which directly undermines the discipline or the chain of command, but which simply expresses an opinion that others consider ugly or headache does not meet this standard.”

Another lawyer for the first amendment noted that in some cases, the members of the service can benefit from stronger speech protections than employees in the private sector, which can be dismissed “at will”.

“Usually, the way an employer of the government moves (arguments of freedom of expression) is to say that the government has the right to protect itself from the statements that have thrown the institution in a negative light or to pose a security problem,” said Jeff Lewis, a lawyer based in California.

“Thus, although public employees have stronger protections of the first amendment than employees in the private sector, the government as an employer generally wins when rights to freedom of expression come up against it to hire and shoot.”

Already, the colonel of the army Scott Stephens was suspended following posts which would belong to him allegedly who praised the murder.

“The death of Charlie Kirk In Utah was tragic. However, we can comfort ourselves in the fact that Charlie did what he liked the most – spread hatred, racism, homophobia, misogyny and transphobia on university campuses, “read an article.

Click here to obtain the Fox News app

Another army reserve officer was suspended this weekend.

“A monster is dead today,” read an article belonging to Major Bryan Bintliff, who went through “Bryan Harlow” on social networks. “They are the children of Sad Charlie are traumatized for life, but it is not sad that he is dead.”