Yesterday, the United States entered a new and chilling stage of what I have called the “age of rage.” After two attempted assassinations of President Donald Trump, leading conservative leader Charlie Kirk, father of two, was gunned down at a campus event at Utah Valley University. I learned the news while I was in Prague to speak on my book,“The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” and the growing attacks on free speech around the world. I never imagined that I would be speaking about Charlie’s murder and what it represents for free speech.
I cannot claim to have been a close friend of Charlie Kirk, but I knew him and respected him. In his relatively short life, Charlie energized a generation of conservative college students at a time of intense liberal orthodoxy and intolerance.
Kirk came up with the brilliant idea of challenging liberals to simply debate issues from abortion to immigration. His group would go to campuses and invite debate with signs reading “prove me wrong” and encourage liberals to engage in dialogue rather than violence.
The left had particular reason to hate Kirk. Campuses have long been the bastions of the left, reinforced by faculties which now have few, if any, conservatives or Republicans. Higher education has long been an incubator for intolerance; shaping a generation of speech phobics who shout down or attack those with opposing views.
Kirk struck at the heart of that power base. Polls show that most students do not feel comfortable speaking about their values in our universities and many conservatives hide their views to avoid retaliation from faculty and students.
Kirk was changing that but showing students that they could be open and bold about their views. He told them that they did not have to yield to orthodoxy and the groupthink. Now he’s dead.
What is most chilling about the murder of Charlie Kirk is that it was not in the least surprising. Not anymore.
The response to TPUSA was all too often rage and violence. Liberals and anti-free speech groups like Antifa would trash their tables and threaten the students. Recently, at UC Davis, police simply watched as a TPUSA tent was torn apart and the tent carried off.
Violent speech has long been acceptable on campuses so long as it targets conservatives. Teachers have called for others to “take out” Trump supporters and for the Secret Service to assassinate him.
University of Wisconsin Professor José Felipe Alvergue, head of the English Department, turned over the table of College Republicans supporting a conservative for the Wisconsin Supreme Court. He reportedly declared, “The time for this is over!”
At universities, professors have called for “detonating white people,” denouncing police, calling for Republicans to suffer, strangling police officers, celebrating the death of conservatives, calling for the killing of Trump supporters, supporting the murder of conservative protesters, and supporting the attempted assassination of President Trump. One professor who declared that there is “nothing wrong” with such acts of violence as killing conservatives was actually promoted.
At Hunter College in New York, Professor Shellyne Rodríguez trashed a pro-life display of students, telling the students that “This is bulls–t. This is violent. You’re triggering my students.”
When the students tried to engage the professor and apologized for upsetting her, Rodríguez yelled, “No you’re not — because you can’t even have a f–king baby. So you don’t even know what that is. Get this s–t the f–k out of here.” In an Instagram post, she is then shown trashing the table.
Hunter College, however, did not consider this unhinged attack on students to be sufficient to terminate Rodríguez. It only fired her after she later chased reporters with a machete. She was then hired by another college. She was shown in a later rally exciting the group with references to “slitting the master’s throat.”
At the University of California Santa Barbara, they did not even bother to fire a professor who pleaded guilty to assaulting pro-life students on campus. Professors actually rallied around feminist studies associate professor Mireille Miller-Young. She was later honored as a model for women advocates at the University of Oregon.
In my book, I detail prior “ages of rage,” including periods of political violence by anarchists, socialists, and other groups. I previously warned that we were not only following this same trajectory, but it was accelerating. The reason is the curious nature of rage:
“What few today want to admit is that they like it. They like the freedom that it affords, the ability to hate and harass without a sense of responsibility. It is evident all around us as people engage in language and conduct that they repudiate in others. We have become a nation of rage addicts; flailing against anyone or anything that stands in opposition to our own truths.
Like all addictions, there is not only a dependency on rage but an intolerance for opposing views. The difference between rage and reason is often one’s own views. If one agrees with the underlying grievance, rage is viewed as passion or justified fury at injustice. If one disagrees with those views, it takes on a more threatening and unhinged quality. We seem to spend much of our time today raging at each other. Despite the amplification of views on both sides, there is also an increasing intolerance for opposing views. Those views are treated as simply harmful and offensive—and, therefore, intolerable. Indeed, to voice free speech principles in a time of rage is to invite the rage of the mob.”
That addiction to rage has now claimed another victim who had the audacity to speak boldly and openly about his conservative views. What will follow will be the usual perfunctory expressions of sympathy and denouncing of violence by the very politicians who have fueled the rage.
In recent months, some of us have warned Democratic politicians about their violent rhetoric. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) has called for people to take to the streets to save democracy and posted a picture brandishing a baseball bat.
Former Democratic National Committee deputy chair Keith Ellison, now the Minnesota attorney general, once said Antifa would “strike fear in the heart” of Trump. Liberal sites sell Antifa items to celebrate the violent group.
California Governor Gavin Newsom declared, “I’m going to punch these sons of bitches in the mouth.” It follows other violent rhetoric from Democratic leaders.
One House member explained to Axios, “Some of [our supporters] have suggested … what we really need to do is be willing to get shot.” Yet another admitted that constituents have told them to prepare for “violence … to fight to protect our democracy.” Others reported that liberals are talking about the need “to storm the White House and stuff like that.”
In one encounter, a lawmaker recounted that “I actually said in a meeting, ‘When they light a fire, my thought is to grab an extinguisher’. And someone at the table said, ‘Have you tried gasoline?’”
Some have. Protesters are burning cars, dealerships, and even lawyers and reporters on the left are throwing Molotov cocktails at police. We have also seen a massive increase in attacks on ICE officers, who are now covering their faces to avoid doxxing or retaliation against themselves or their families. The left has rolled out guillotines and chanted “We got the guillotine, you better run.”
Just before he was shot at Utah Valley University, Kirk rallied the group with its signature chant of “prove me wrong.” The response was to kill Charlie Kirk.
His death could succeed in forcing the thousands of conservative and libertarian students back into the shadows of our campuses and classrooms. We cannot allow that to happen. Charlie Kirk challenged not just the left to debate but the right to be heard in higher education.
Yes, this is an age of rage. However, amidst the rage and the violence, there are a special few who have defied the threats and the attacks. The writer George Bernard Shaw once said that unreasonable people expect the world to conform to them. He then added that that was why all history is made by unreasonable people.
Kirk was one of those wonderfully unreasonable people who refused to yield; refused to be silenced. Despite unrelenting attacks by the media and the establishment, he remained undeterred and unbowed. Students need to remember not how Kirk died, but why he died. His loss is Charlie’s final challenge to all those today wringing their hands and muttering the usual expressions of shocked regret. Kirk would likely say, “prove it.” Speak. Defy those who spend their time silencing others rather than speaking themselves. If you want to honor Charlie Kirk, speak out, speak boldly on both the right and the left. Prove them wrong.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of the best-selling “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
There’s photos of the suspect on TV, now.
Another, where? Two suspects were detained and released. It’s the bottom of the 9th and the bases are loaded.
Uh oh! Your useful idiot is in big trouble!
Ya better start thumbing through the communist playbook
for another tactic
two photos that show no detail!
Democracy always has been mob rule. This the reasonwe formed a Republic.
Democracy, a definition:
Two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Author Unknown
-g
Dear Prof Turley,
Didn’t know anything about young Charlie Kirk, wrapped in my cocoon of political-partisan abstinence, but have come to understand he adamantly opposed U.S. involvement in Ukraine .. . and on that we certainly Agreed!
Very much doubt Liberal-Democratic orthodoxy, however unhinged, had anything to do with Kirks assassination. The information I’m seeing suggests this was a ‘professional hit’.
Interestingly, the Russians are saying supporters of Ukraine are involved. Indeed, for years the Ukraine SBU/Ministry of Defense (fully funded by U.S. State Dept.) has published a list [‘Myrotvorets’] of ‘enemies of the State – including U.S. citizens – worthy of assassination. Former U.S. Intel officer/UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter was at the top of that list.
In any case .. . ‘war is politics by other means’.
*”Fight like Hell” ~ Trump Jan. 6, 2020
Very much doubt Liberal-Democratic orthodoxy, however unhinged, had anything to do with Kirks assassination. The information I’m seeing suggests this was a ‘professional hit’.
Those two are not mutually exclusive. An adherent to Liberal-Democrat orthodoxy might have hired the hit.
Odd. .. I would have thought Lib/Dem orthodoxy and ‘professional’ anything mutually exclusive.
*ie. they would have to hire a professional hit.
” Liberal-Democratic orthodoxy”
It also depends on what you think those words mean.
Liberal can mean progressive, but It can also mean classical liberal like Milton Friedman or me.
A Democrat can be associated with JFK, who was killed by a leftist and communist.
JFK’s killing can be said to have been done by supporters of today’s Democrat Party.
“This morning my team received an e-mail from officer at ATF.
The email included a screen shot from what appears to be an internal message describing a weapon and cartridges located by an ATF and other law enforcement near the scene of the Charlie Kirk shooting at Utah Valley State University.
“On September 10, 2025, at approximately 12:24PM, Conservative political influencer Charlie Kirk was shot and killed at the Utah Valley University in Orem, UT. Mr. Kirk was speaking at the University as part of the American Comeback Tour. Multiple SLC I and III agents responded immediately. The suspect fired one shot from an elevated position on a rooftop in an adjacent building on the campus and surveillance video shows the suspect, jumping off and fleeing the area on foot. ATF and other law-enforcement located an older model imported Mauser .30-06 caliber bolt action rifle wrapped in a towel in a wooded area near the campus. The location of the firearm appears to match the suspects route of travel. The spent cartridge was still chambered in addition to three unspent rounds at the top fed magazine. All cartridges have engraved wording on them, expressing transgender and anti-fascist ideology. An emergency trace has been submitted an ATF SLC is working leads generated by the trace. The firearm and ammunition have been taken by the FBI for DNA analysis and fingerprint impressions. Upon completion of forensics, the firearm will be disassembled for additional importer information. Multiple people of interest having contacted or detained because of eyewitness testimony and review of video footage. The primary suspect is yet to be identified. ATF is assisting the investigation with multiple other federal, state, and local partners and the case is co-led by the FBI and Utah SBI.”
pic.twitter.com/UKtOUPY5DC
— Steven Crowder (@scrowder) September 11, 2025
Kirk was shot in the neck. A professional would of made a head shot. This shooter was likely aiming for the head but not being a professional, did not compensate for the downward angle, hence the neck shot.
“All cartridges have engraved wording on them, expressing transgender and anti-fascist ideology.”
Nuts!
Got a theory, here, UsF: the neck-shot may have been purposeful [and not just bad aim], as Charlie’s last broadcast (or one of his last) was about the “neck” stabbing of Iryna Zarutska.
Another coincidence: He was answering a question about the Minnesota Catholic-School shooter, in the moment. While most will not see connections, it is fair to consider that these extreme-left-psychopaths enjoy a sense of symbolism and ritual in their “victory,” which seems to be evident in the timing of the question with his assassination, and the cheering that erupted simultaneously.
Dianna Bec,
That is an interesting theory. However, if I were to attempt to assassinate someone, which I would not, I would go for the head shot and not depend on luck of a neck, killing shot.
Also, looking at the POI on the neck, if you make a imaginary line straight upward to the head, you come to about the temple. Risky head shot. Assuming a 1/4 inch MOA per click at 100 yards = 1/2 inch MOA at 200 yards scope, the shooter should of come left by two clicks for a more center of mass head shot.
Or that is my own personal theory.
I have read different reports of what Kirk was talking about at the time of the shot taken. Need more information before I could make an assessment. I hope the FBI or Utah LEOs finds the shooter and we can learn more then.
And another conspiracy theory is born.
Your “Russian” DISinformation is either paid or freely given, out of misguided protection for the unhinged and violent Liberal-Democrat-Orthodoxy you excuse, specifically the young-marxist and transgender wing of it.
Stop your pious pithy-quoting, dg, and show some humanity for a man who had more boldness in a swamp of leftist-psychopaths than you ever would.
In April, 2023 Charlie Kirk said that gun deaths are unfortunately worth it to keep our second amendment rights.
He said that it’s worth it to have some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the 2A to protect our other God-given rights.
He said that is a prudent and rational deal.
I abhor all violence and unequivocally condemn this shooting, but “unfortunately” Charlie Kirk has reaped what he has sown.
From Charlie’s favorite book: (Galatians 6:7): “For whatever a man sows, that he will also reap”
Here is a link to that April 2023 story with video included.
https://www.newsweek.com/charlie-kirk-says-gun-deaths-worth-it-2nd-amendment-1793113
It’s also deeply ironic that the question posed to him just before he was shot was about gun violence. Ultimately he just became a victim of the nations never ending gun violence.
Victim of gun violence? Yes. But a victim of “just” that? No . . . there was almost certainly a political motivation here, and rage rhetoric quite possibly played a part. Or do you think this was merely a disgruntled former employee?
It’s also deeply ironic that the question posed to him just before he was shot was about gun violence.
The current version of the Soviet Democrat party and their identity politics groups is the face and body of “gun violence” in America – not Charlie Kirk who you’re hear to smear for political points.
It’s deeply fraudulent and corrupt that Second Amendment hating Democrats never mention the 3,000,000 MILLION defense uses of firearms each year. Never permit context and nuance to expose your dishonesty and your fraud!
That’s – a figure that varies depending on which year the DoJ did a survey on defensive firearms use. The best Obama could do to minimize that number, Eric Holder said he found it was only 2.5 million uses each year. If only 5% of those defensive uses save the life of the handgun owner, that’s 50,000 American lives saved versus the 13,500 lost to murder in 2023.
Does that ratio of lives saved versus lives lost in cities like Chicago every day trouble you?
Chicago Crime, Murder & Mayhem | Criminal Infographics | Hey Jackass!
https://heyjackass.com/
Gun banning Chicago, that anti Second Amendment bastion of Soviet Gun Control, has run up 254 murders and 1156 shot and survived so far this year!
Equally corrupt, you Democrats never want to recognize that the majority of that gun violence takes place in your gun banning utopia cities like Washington DC, Chicago, Baltimore, etc. While Republican states with few gun laws other than those put in place by the federal government have murder rates half that of the national average. Never mind those Democrat butcher shops like Chicago, where Democrats run up record numbers of Democrats butchering other Democrats and their children doing nothing more than playing in their front yards.
Idaho and Montana, for example, where you can walk down Main Street like Lara Croft, Tomb Raider, carrying a legally owned belt fed machine gun in your arms and a machine pistol strapped to each hip without so much as a city permit, have murder rates the same as or less than the Canadian provinces on their northern borders. That’s what Al Gore called “Inconvenient Truths”.
Ultimately he just became a victim of the nations never ending gun violence.
Ultimately, he was a victim of the same violent Democrat rhetoric and violent hatred of conservatives that lead to the attempted mass murder of Republican congressmen by a Bernie Sanders supporter who had been convinced that Republicans would kill people if they took away their Obamacare, as were the five Dallas Police officers murdered by a Democrat Black Liars & Marxists racists who were shot from ambush by a murderer that died later screaming he wanted to kill all white Americans.
Not only about gun violence but gun violence by transgender individuals and according to reports there were messages on the rifle and ammunition regarding trans rhetoric.
And he wasn’t a victim of a never ending gun violence, he was a victim of the hate by those for whom free speech must be banished and demonization of opponents as destroyers of democracy must be eliminated by any means necessary,
Suppose I say: “Auto accidents and drunk driving are unfortunately something we are going to have to live with in order to keep our right to drive cars. That’s just the reality we have to live with.”
If I say that, does it mean I’ve reaped what I sowed when someone kills me by purposefully running over me with their car?
Charlie would have and probably did use the same exact counter argument to dull unamusing gaseous nonsensical arguments.
you are precisely correct and the OP making the ridiculous claim is a simpleton.
this is really what Charlie was about. He had that certain sense about truth and believed in it so much that he was willing to confront, unpolitely at times and challenge the stupid elements that have fueled ridiculous and unworkable ideas. At his core, Charlie believed that by telling the truth one could raise up society, investing in it, the missing elements of simple logic, reason, morality, and faith…with the last element being prominent and fundamental to all of his believes and campaigns. Charlie did want to change the world and he had the right stuff and was not a lazy minded and corrupt sinful man. I believe, like most, his success will last a very very long time even after this outrageous assassination. His voice will become all that more powerful and people across this nation, ponder as he did himself: what can I do?
Charlie left us all with a wonderful easy to follow template. If you disagree fundamentally on an issue, be willing to debate in public. be willing to denounce ridiculous and unworkable ideas. be willing, yes, to push back against those who would say, the only options left are force and violence. be willing to invest in yourself and take a risk…even if it means putting your very life at risk for the ideas that you hold dear.
charlie wasn’t superman. bullets are not his kryptonite. his kryptonite will be forgetting what he actually said and believed in…his courage to say the things most people are too afraid of saying out loud, even to friends.
Charlie will not be forgotten. I pray for his family and friends that they heal from this loss and recover back to a life of normal and get back into the arena and fill this country with hope in spite of this horrible crime.
God Bless America
regitigerf – thank you for that inspiring essay. You are right in everything you said, there’s not much to add. God bless.
regitigerf
What a load of nonsensical bloviating that entirely misses the point.
I simply pointed out Charlie Kirk’s exact words.
He said that “gun deaths are unfortunately worth it to keep our second amendment rights.” He used the words “UNFORTUNATELY WORTH IT”.
So he is saying that it is unfortunate that some people are going to die in order for us to keep our 2A rights.
Unfortunate indeed!!!
Well, he is perfectly entitled to that point of view.
The problem is, of course, that he fails to consider that HIS death may be “UNFORTUNATELY WORTH IT”
The issue is very, very simple.
If you play with matches, expect to get burned.
Or suppose I say: “Homicide by vehicle is unfortunately a consequence we will have to live with if we want to keep our right to drive cars, and I believe it’s worth it because otherwise we’d have to get rid of all cars.”
Does that mean I have reaped what I sowed when someone purposefully kills me by running over me with their car?
omfk
You are deliberately obfuscating by drawing a completely false equivalence.
Please tell us in which state there is a “RIGHT” to drive a car.
Last time I checked every state requires a driver to pass a written test, and a practical test, before obtaining a license to drive.
Why can’t we do the same for gun ownership?
I’m not obfuscating. The fact people have to have a license to drive a car is completely irrelevant to the point I made.
Also, you’re wrong: Scotus has held that driving privileges are a right protected by the Due Process Clause. Mackey v. Montrym (1979). And it’s not true that anyone can own a gun. You have to be of age.
Again, the driver skills test necessary to get one’s first license is completely irrelevant to the point I made.
omfk
The point you are trying to make is only relevant in your twisted MAGA mind.
Why is it relevant ???
The point you are falsely trying to make is that there is some equivalence between an entirely fictional and non-existent “RIGHT” to drive a car, and a right to own a gun, which obviously is a real right conferred by the Constitution.
There is simply no comparison.
And the Mackey v. Montrym case you cite is also irrelevant.
That case simply struck down a Massachusetts law that mandated immediate cancellation of a drivers license for refusing a breathalyzer test. The issue was that such a driver was deprived of due process before cancellation.
It absolutely did NOT establish a “RIGHT” to the issuance of a drivers license.
It simply established that a drivers license, once issued, cannot be cancelled without due process.
You are either ignorant of the meaning of this case, or are again deliberately trying to obfuscate and deflect.
No, anonymous clown. You suggested that Charlie Kirk reaped what he sowed when he was brutally murdered? How in your twisted evil mind did he sow his own brutal murder? By standing up for constitutional rights? By doing so in a civil manner, always inviting logical discourse and condemning violence? And you can’t even support your stupid point logically? GFY.
And having a written and skills test for gun ownership has nothing to do with Charlie Kirk’s very valid point for which you’re saying he reaped what he sowed.
Your point might have some semblance of logic if Kirk had said there should be no skills test or training and he was murdered due to the gun possessor’s lack of skill. But here you didn’t start with the idea that Kirk rejected a skills test, and the gunman was quite skilled given the distance and the aim.
You fail to understand that the problem is the evil in the human heart. Kirk was not killed by a gun, but by an evil person who couldn’t “prove him wrong.” A person like that would have found another way even if he didn’t have a gun. The fact the killer used a gun is not in any way shape or form “reaping what he sowed” in upholding our constitutional rights. Your suggestion otherwise is only because the same evil is in your heart and mind. You are a mentally diseased, sick, twisted, evil person, and that comes through loud and clear in your despicable, shameful comments. I don’t blame you for always commenting anonymously. If I said the same stupid garbage as you, I’d comment anonymously too.
omfk
He absolutely reaped what he sowed.
He said “gun deaths are unfortunately worth it to keep our second amendment rights.”
He is perfectly entitled to that point of view, but he failed to consider that HIS death may be “UNFORTUNATELY WORTH IT”.
He has to realize that it is not just other people who are going to die.
If he takes that position, then he has to accept the possibility that he will be one of those that die.
I don’t know why you attacking me, and spouting all the MAGA talking points about guns don’t kill people.
I’m just pointing out Kirk’s exact words, and the fact that he has failed to consider the consequences of those words, nothing more, nothing less.
They are his words, not mine.
What happened to him was the “consequence of his words”. Thats why you’re being attacked, you fvxking imbecile.
Murder is not the consequence of supporting the second amendment, ya goddam blithering idiot.
omfk. You are deliberately obfuscating by drawing a completely false equivalence. Last time I checked every state requires a driver to pass a written test, and a practical test, before obtaining a license to drive. Why can’t we do the same for gun ownership?
Those words “completely false equivalency”… I don’t think you know what they mean – even when engaged in doing exactly that.
As you’ve brought up deliberately obfuscating and drawing a completely false equivalencey:
1. Where in the Bill of Rights is the amendment that says you have a RIGHT to a license to drive – as opposed to that being a state granted privilege.
2. Should the federal test that must be passed before exercising your Second Amendment rights be exactly the same as the federal test that you personally passed before you were allowed to come here and publicly exercise your First Amendment rights?
How about the test you were required to pass before being allowed to exercise your right to participate in Black Liars & Marxists and/or Antifa protests?
You want to model your Second Amendment test on those tests you passed before being permission to exercise your First Amendment rights?
You clown yourself out in public, you Democrat Marxist Useful Idiot… and you aren’t even smart enough to realize that.
Who is this ——- idiotic fascist troll?
With all due respect (none). Go to hell.
“I abhor all violence and unequivocally condemn this shooting, but “unfortunately” Charlie Kirk has reaped what he has sown”
Sounds to me you are justifying the shooting. Perhaps you believe that all defenders of the 2nd Amendment “reaps” assassination.
I find your statement supremely hypocritical
You clearly know nothing of scripture. Get your facts straight, Master of truth and logic, Charlie Kirk is NOT “reaping what he sowed.”
He is a martyr to free-speech, the cause of logic and reason, the good and the right, and the normal. He was murdered by the whole-cloth-IDEOLOGY you represent with your false piety and wet-behind-the-ears cheap use of scripture. EVIL exist and it is currently running rampant at the hands of the extreme-left, whose devil-proponents (present at the execution) stood up and cheered like deranged sociopaths, the instant he was shot.
If you have one whit or REASON in your soul, wake up and stop encouraging this kind of violence via your fake-piety about “abhorring violence.”—no you don’t. You just took time out of your day to rationalize it.
Get your facts straight, Master Charlie Kirk is NOT a “victim of gun violence.” He is a martyr to the cause of logic and reason, the good and right,free speech, and the normal. He was murdered by the whole-cloth-IDEOLOGY you represent, by the extreme-left, whose proponents (present at the execution) stood up and cheered like deranged sociopaths, the instant he was shot.
If you have one whit or REASON in your soul, wake up and stop encouraging this kind of violence via your fake-piety about guns.
Grateful Dead Live-Death Don’t Have No Mercy
Charlie Kirk: Compassion and caring for his children and wife. Gratitude and appreciation for his life.
Who Will Stop America’s Slide Into the Abyss?
“At the time of writing, we don’t know who shot Charlie Kirk, or why. But we do know anarchy has been loosed on the American left. In the throes of socialist ideology, climate apocalypticism, and anti-Zionist fervor, radicals have become untethered from reality and the rule of law. What their nineteenth-century ancestors called “propaganda of the deed”—riots, vandalism, harassment, assault, and worse—has returned to America’s campuses and city streets, with deadly consequences. Stopping its growth is no easy task.”
by Matthew Continetti
https://www.thefp.com/p/who-will-stop-americas-slide-into-abyss-charlie-kirk-violence
We know why.
OT – COURTS MAY NOT DIRECT THE PRESIDENT – COURTS POSSESS NO EXECUTIVE POWER
1. Judicial Power under the Constitution
Article III limits courts to deciding “Cases” and “Controversies.”
That means courts may interpret law, determine rights, and issue judgments between parties, but they do not have general supervisory or command authority over the executive branch or the President personally.
2. Orders Directed to the President
Historically, the Supreme Court has recognized that lower courts cannot order the President to perform specific duties.
Key case: Mississippi v. Johnson (71 U.S. 475, 1867)
Mississippi tried to get an injunction to stop President Andrew Johnson from enforcing the Reconstruction Acts.
The Supreme Court held: the judiciary has no power to enjoin the President in the performance of his official duties.
Rationale: The President is a coequal constitutional officer, not subject to judicial control except through impeachment or the political process.
3. Exceptions / Limits
Courts can review executive actions for constitutionality (e.g., United States v. Nixon, 1974), but even then, they generally address executive officers or agencies—not the President personally—when issuing enforceable orders.
When courts need “specific performance” (such as enforcing subpoenas, producing documents, or stopping unlawful actions), they usually direct their orders to subordinate executive officials, not the President himself.
4. Unconstitutionality of Direct Orders
So if a lower court issues an order compelling the President himself to take or refrain from action (a form of “specific performance”), that runs against the doctrine in Mississippi v. Johnson and exceeds Article III judicial power.
Such orders are generally regarded as unconstitutional intrusions into the executive function.
✅ Summary:
The Constitution gives courts judicial power to decide cases, but not to command the President’s official conduct.
Supreme Court precedent (e.g., Mississippi v. Johnson) makes clear that orders of specific performance directed at the President are unconstitutional.
Courts may declare laws or actions invalid, and they may bind executive officials, but they cannot treat the President as a subordinate officer subject to judicial orders.
– ChatGPT
God Bless Charlie Kirk And His Family
Got anything better than that, George? Because in other news, the creators of ChatGPT have told it’s fervent users that it lies to them… but they’re going to try to get it to do better!
The Truth About ChatGPT’s Lies: Unraveling AI Deception
https://www.downelink.com/the-truth-about-chatgpts-lies-unraveling-ai-deception/
I Taught ChatGPT to Lie — Here’s What Happened Next
https://medium.com/@Bhanu_/i-taught-chatgpt-to-lie-heres-what-happened-next-4712b526c451
Would you care to cite the Constitution or just make it up as you go along, comrade?
I respectfully disagree with Prof. Turley on one detail.
The rage we see IMHO definitely is lopsided, far more on the Left than on the Right.
Mr. Kirk’s assassination may lead to a turning point in US politics as the Right finally realizes that the Left actually DOES want to kill them. It is not merely rhetoric, it is an expression of intent.
Reports are that liberals in the audience cheered when Kirk was shot.
The English language lacks the vocabulary to express the absolute disgust and contempt one must feel for such horrid people.
Most likely they were students and we cannot afford to ignore the fact that ‘our’ universities and the corporate media too often encourage and promote the indoctrination that manufactures these deranged, soulless fanatics.
Who and what are behind this pathology in public institutions?
What was that response on Jan 6 when trump said to go to the Capitol? Oh yea, over 1,000 people stormed the Capitol, beat police with flag poles, punched police, ransacked the building, called for pence to be hung.
And how did trump respond? He pardoned violent people because they “loved him”
Killing Kirk was wrong, disgusting. Pardoning violent people that ransacked the Capitol building, called for the VP to be hung and beat Capitol Police was wrong.
Calling for violence and doing actual violence is wrong. Period.
Given that the MSM and Dems are hell bent to fundamentally transform America (the land of the free), why should / would any foul verbiage or the taunting of others to be violent cease ?
#HateLovesAbortion
Anybody here seen my old friend Charlie?
Can you tell me where he’s gone?
He freed a lot of people
But it seems the good, they die young
I just looked around and he’s gone
Oldman
The gun was found.
‘A Gun’ was found. Perhaps the one the Sniper wanted them to find.
Snipers can break down their kit (disassemble the gun) so they can be mobile on foot.
A professional would have brought their weapon for the Target AND a decoy gun to be found and traced far away from the Shooter.
They planted the decoy on the way into the Event (in the woods), then proceeded to their mount and and take out the Mark.
Weapon breakdown 30 seconds, pack into a shoulder pack, sprinkle a spent jacket from the decoy and break away.
If it was a Pro they are not going to catch this guy. some poor sap will be nailed for wearing clothes that day which were similar to to the Suspect.
Who killed Kirk, the person or Organization that ordered the Hit. The Sniper is just a part of the weapon system, the one that “pulled the trigger” in the one that issued the Contract. This was not a Lone Assassin with a score to settle.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o5TmORitlKk
The Left knows that they cannot win a debate based on substance. Their only recourse is to silence anyone who disagrees with them, no matter how polite and civil that disagreement may be.
JLM,
Well said. And the times the left did engage with Kirk in debate, they lost big time. That is why they always accuse him of hate speech, racist, etc. They just could not defend their bad policies. That is why they hate anyone who dares to question their policies. That is why they always resort to calling them things like fascists, Nazis etc.
Earlier, someone posted that getting closer to VIP’s can attract a much lager audience, like riding in a Cadillac convertible.
The Democrats want to use violence. Give them violence in kind. Republicans don’t shoot Democrats they don’t like, or haven’t yet. This could, in Charlile’s own words, be the Turning Point.
I have a better idea, indict them lawfully for their crimes and prosecute them to the fullest extent in a military tribunal where partisan politics is null and void. In cases where life is lost or taken, execute them, where treason is evident, execute them. It is time for America to end this exercise in madness and employ common sense and practice on behalf of the American people.
military tribunal? Good lord man, you belong in 1942 Germany. Or maybe Los Angeles 2025.
Really, have you not been watching the partisan activist judiciary in these Democratic controlled States? A military tribunal removes that component. It will deliver justice unlike the joke we are watching.
I understand the emotion, but if we go down that road I believe the end situation will be worse than we can imagine.
@oldman
Agreed. That’s not the answer. I think they’ll catch him, we will not be surprised in the least by his ideology, and in Utah, they may put him on death row. I’d prefer that for now. We are not in the same deep water as the rest of the West thanks to November; this would be jumping in with both feet.
James.
I hope the FBI does, but since the FBI has been so poorly run the last ten years. I just don’t trust them.
@Anonymous
I think you are another troll, thinking they are on some kind of uber conservative site (you aren’t), posing as such, in an attempt to incite. Not gonna work, and how are things going in ‘Patriot Front’? 🙄🙄🙄
James – or it could be a false flag leftist pretending to be a violent right-winger.
Oldman–
My first guess was Antifa or one of its offshoots. We will see.
I think it was in Portland a few years ago that Antifa barricaded the doors of a police station and set it on fire trapping officers inside. If true, that was attempted murder and I wondered why the criminals weren’t more actively pursued. But Biden was in power and Antifa seemed to be the Brownshirt arm of the Democrats so not much was done.
My recollection is likely off in some details, more of an impression than a memory but in general Antifa appears violent and that needs to be addressed.
@oldman
Precisely my thoughts.
It was not Democrats that stormed the Capitol Building on Jan 6, 2021. It was trump supporters.
It’s time for the remedy to Leftist violence to be applied. Not discussed, not debated, not even demanded. Applied! That means that every person outraged by its existence, those sickened by its actions and all who are simply sick and tired of being victimized must rise up as one and confront the evil that it is. The method? That’s has been decided by the Left and their violent rhetoric, the actions of their acolytes and the sanctions expressed by the complicit media. The sanctification of violence is a proven double edged sword. A sword swung in rage should anticipate an immediate parry. The die is cast. The Rubicon crossed. And, understand this. No longer will the words of professional academics suffice. The High Road is swept away. The time has come to settle this matter has been foisted upon us by the Left. But the manner of its settlement is ours to choose. To all of you who urge restraint. Where have you been? To those who excuse the Left. Remain silent. And, to those who participate in it, enable it, support it, or even consider joining it….Go hide.
Charlie Kirk was murdered under a “prove me wrong” banner. The haters could not prove him wrong. So they murdered him instead. They are now on social media celebrating his death.
Oldman.
There is a video of a young women at the event. She was shocked how the lib students were laughing after He was shot. Has our once proud nation fallen this far?
Dustoff – alas, it appears our nation has fallen that far.
Dems you sick busters you caused this burn 🔥 in hell
This is what Trump has been saying,
“It’s a long past time for all Americans and the media to confront the fact that violence and murder are the tragic consequence of demonizing those with whom you disagree.”
“For years, those on the radical Left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world’s worst mass murderers and criminals,” he added. “This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now.”
The irony of that statement is not lost on those who recognize that Trump is also guilty of demonizing those who he disagrees with. Judges, Lawyers, critics, comedians, etc. When he does, his followers add to his demonizing rhetoric and do the exact same thing he is now complaining about. Judges have been threatened by MAGA fans because of Trump’s demonizing and false claims. Engaging in rage rhetoric to attack those who “do him wrong”.
Professor Turley has complained about rhetoric being used to provoke rage and anger when it comes from the left, but stays silent or gives it a pass when those on the right engage in it. That kind of hypocrisy undermines Professor Turley’s arguments and shows that his position is disingenuous on this subject.
X
demonizing those who he disagrees with. Judges, Lawyers,
*************************
So the Prez can’t speak about people who trash him? Yet has he ever said to harm others like say Maxie Waters and other libs.
More drivel from george xs. It rewrites the same drivel in each comment.
True
My dear “X” – the Point you are missing is the VIOLENCE FACTOR… there is plain ole political ‘demonizing’ talk known to man forever..(Biden did it as much as Trump..) and there is the now developed political ‘demonizing talk’ with an overwhelming mega dose of RAGE calling for VIOLENCE… and therein lies the Difference.. and the Murder of a young man who simply wanted to Debate…………… Prof. Turley makes the Point exceedingly clear.. please wake up!
No Professor Turley clearly condemned violence on both sides. Please show me where a conservative activist has attacked a liberal before being attacked themselves.
Jan 6, 2021
X/George: The irony of that statement is not lost on those who recognize that Trump is also guilty of demonizing those who he disagrees with.
The ones whose version of disagreement is to claim he’s a Nazi, that he’s a racist, that he’s an anti-Semitic, a proven traitor via your Obama/Clinton “Trump-Russia Dossier”?
Those ones are Trump’s victims you are speaking about, X/George? No demonetization in the now nine years that you and your fellow Soviet Democrats have been spouting those lies and claims?
The desperate Soviet Democrat “BBBUUUTTT… MUH Trump!” in that deflection is not lost on those of us who see your rage that Trump replied to those demonizing him with the exact same tone that they set in their attacks on him! They set the rules – and then claim to be victims because Trump played by the rules they set.
Your Soviet Democrat apparatchik training didn’t provide you with the skills to attempt to claim Trump was responding in that manner to what was supposedly reasonable intelligent commentary – rather than vile ad hominum attacks?
HOW DARE HE SPEAK TO THEM LIKE THEY SPEAK TO HIM! NO FAIR – WE DEMOCRATS HAVE A RIGHT TO ATTACK FROM OUR SAFE SPACES!
I think it would have served both Trump (and Republican voters in general) far better if he had taken a few moments to respond to those accusations and attacks in a more skillful manner that left you fewer straws to grasp at. James Woods, DeSantis and others have shown how easily you witless Soviet Democrats can be flayed and exposed by using different language to say the same things that Trump says off the cuff.
I continue to wish that he would change his choice of words he uses to respond to your lies and defamation – but I don’t want to see him stop throwing your lies back in your faces and exposing you for what you are.
Don’t change a single thing you’re saying or doing, right through the midterms and on to the next presidential election. Clearly, you have a winning strategy to win control of America.
Shocked, shocked I say, to read another Turley editorial cherry picking the life and times of an individual who was such a bastion of free speech, that he published a website of academic scholars who he disagreed with, for his followers to go harass and surveil. He should still be alive and should still have the right to spout the hateful rhetoric he trafficked in – but at least have the respect for your readers to tell the whole story, Mr. Turley.
Ano
He should still be alive and should still have the right to spout the hateful rhetoric he trafficked in
************************
Telling the truth hurts you? WOW
Earlier Anonymous wrote about the killing of Melisa Hortman and her husband. She failed to mention the no kings posters were found in his car which was a rallying call against Trump. The guy was an equal opportunity hater of politicians not a Trump supporter. This is the best example that Anonymous can come up with about equal violence by the right. What’s new. Anonymous has supported an MS- 13 member who beat his wife. Even beating your wife is acceptable if it furthers the cause of demonizing those on the right. Thank you Anonymous for your contribution.
TiT,
The annony moron also tried to assert some of those people as Trump supporters when they were clearly out of their minds. One of them thought he was Jesus.
he published a website of academic scholars who he disagreed with, for his followers to go harass and surveil… he should still have the right to spout the hateful rhetoric he trafficked in
Not shocked that a vile Democrat demagogue would lie that Kirk ever directed or inferred that those listening to him should go harass or otherwise bother academic “scholars” whose ideas he disagreed with i.e. parents should give trannies permission to go dangle their wedding tackle in their little girl’s changerooms.
Kirk did exactly the opposite: he stopped audience members who booed or jeered anyone who engaged with him. You will not reappear with a link to video showing Kirk being disrespectful to anyone he engaged with, nor video or writings where he encouraged listeners to harass people. You’re only as good as your last lie.
But here you are – lying that Kirk was the opposite person from what anyone can see him doing on video. Kirk never changed from showing respect to those he engaged with on ideas and policies – even when those he was engaged with were vile liars like you.
So… nothing new to see here, just the old same old-same old. Just as you lied that The Oval Office House Plant was fully competent and working his earnest young aids to death when in fact somebody else and The AutoPen was running the country.
Kirk’s Cultural War Crime for Democrat apparatchiks like you was showing Americans (particularly young Americans targeted by Democrats) that the Democrats could not survive in the arena of ideas, where their proclamations and beliefs could be questioned and forced to be confronted with rational debate.