By A proposal to erect a memorial at Utah Valley University honoring conservative activist Charlie Kirk, who was assassinated during a campus event last month, has ignited a fierce battle over memory, politics, and free speech.
Kirk, the outspoken founder of Turning Point USA, was killed on Sept. 10, 2025, while speaking at UVU. Now, plans to commemorate him with a permanent on-campus memorial have split the community — with over 15,000 students and activists signing a petition opposing the idea, and more than 21,000 others rallying behind a counter-petition in support.
The backlash erupted into visible protest this week, as UVU Students for a Democratic Society, a liberal group, staged demonstrations calling the proposed tribute inappropriate and incendiary.
“We don’t want his likeness on campus; we don’t want his likeness sort of immortalized,” said student Collin Grannis, speaking to KSTU.
“For one thing, it’s going to get vandalized — there’s no way it’s not,” warned protester Abagael Woods, who also argued it would “re-traumatize a bunch of people.” Woods suggested instead a “memorial for unity” — possibly therapy dogs on campus — to promote healing without political baggage.
The anti-memorial petition echoes that sentiment, accusing Kirk of fostering division and “negativity,” particularly through his advocacy for gun rights. Rather than honoring Kirk, it calls for a memorial to “the countless children who have tragically lost their lives to gun violence in schools,” offering a counterpoint focused on victims rather than provocateurs.
But supporters of the Kirk memorial see the opposition as an attack on ideological pluralism — and on the memory of a man murdered for his views. Their petition frames the tribute as a defense of free expression and intellectual diversity on campus.
Among those weighing in is legal scholar Jonathan Turley, who has longstanding ties to UVU and once received its Madison Award. Calling UVU “a wonderful academic institution with a growing and vibrant intellectual community,” Turley decried the backlash as a symptom of deeper cultural intolerance.
“There is a sense of license among some to oppose memorials for individuals with differing viewpoints,” Turley said, warning that objections based on potential vandalism are “chilling.” He argued such threats should “strengthen the university’s resolve to proceed.”
Turley also blasted the argument that a Kirk memorial might inflict psychological harm. “Critics implying protection from ‘trauma’ of further crimes is menacing and mendacious,” he said, describing Kirk as someone who “invited debate and fought for a diversity of opinion on campuses.” That such a figure, he said, has now become “the subject of a cancel campaign” even in death, is a mark of the moment.
UVU officials have yet to announce whether the memorial will move forward. But the standoff mirrors tensions across the country, where proposed tributes to Kirk have been vandalized, removed, or preemptively blocked in the wake of his assassination.
As both petitions continue to gather momentum, the controversy underscores how even in death, Charlie Kirk remains a flashpoint — not only for political debate, but for deeper national questions over who deserves remembrance, and on what terms.
[Read More: Trump Trolls About Running For Vice President]
