A Florida wildlife biologist has filed a federal lawsuit claiming her First Amendment rights were violated after she was fired for reposting a social media comment mocking the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
The Post That Sparked It All
Brittney Brown, a former employee of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), was terminated on September 15 after sharing a repost to her private Instagram story.
The post read:
“The whales are deeply saddened to learn of the shooting of Charlie Kirk, haha just kidding, they care exactly as much as Charlie Kirk cared about children being shot in their classrooms, which is to say, not at all.”
The remark spread rapidly online after being amplified by conservative accounts such as LibsofTikTok, which called for Brown’s firing.
Agency Response
In announcing Brown’s dismissal, the FWC said the post was inconsistent with its mission and values.
“We have a zero-tolerance policy towards the promotion of violence and hate, and we will not stand for such behavior,” the agency said in a statement. “The post made light of a tragic killing and violated the trust the public places in our employees.”
FWC leaders said the decision was made to preserve professionalism and protect public confidence.
The Lawsuit
On September 30, Brown filed suit in federal court in Tallahassee, becoming one of the first Florida state employees to challenge such a termination following Kirk’s assassination on September 10.
Her complaint alleges that FWC Executive Director Roger Young and her supervisor, Melissa Tucker, retaliated against her and discriminated against her viewpoint.
Brown’s attorney, Gary Edinger, argued the repost was not a “true threat” or obscenity and had no connection to her official job duties, which focused on birds and not public-facing roles.
The lawsuit, supported by attorneys from the ACLU of Florida, seeks reinstatement, back pay, damages, and a ruling that her termination violated her First Amendment rights.
“It is deeply disturbing and undemocratic to see such firings take place across the state and in the country,” Edinger said.
ACLU of Florida Director Bacardi Jackson added: “Florida’s attempt to punish employees for their viewpoints is part of a dangerous effort to erode free speech protections.”
The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Mark Walker.
A National Pattern
Brown’s lawsuit is part of a broader wave of legal actions across the country. Since Kirk’s killing, dozens of public employees — including teachers, nurses, and university staff — have faced suspensions, investigations, or firings over comments about the conservative commentator.
-
In Iowa, a high school teacher sued after being terminated for comparing Kirk to a Nazi.
-
In South Carolina, a teacher’s assistant was fired for posting disagreement with Kirk’s views but calling his death a tragedy.
-
In Indiana, a university employee lost their job after condemning Kirk’s death but criticizing his beliefs.
The Bigger Question
Legal experts say these cases test the boundaries of free speech for public employees. Courts often consider whether the employee was speaking as a private citizen on a matter of public concern — and whether the employer’s interest in maintaining order outweighs that speech.
As Clay Calvert of the American Enterprise Institute explained:
“Criticizing Kirk’s views is one thing. Celebrating his death is another. Courts will need to decide how far First Amendment protections extend for government employees.”
The Florida case highlights the growing tension between personal expression online and professional accountability. For Brittney Brown, the lawsuit isn’t just about getting her job back — it’s about testing how much free speech a public employee truly has when their private words collide with political firestorms.
