FIREwire — December 12, 2025
New lawsuit over Charlie Kirk posts, and free speech advocates rally to support FIRE’s defense of First Amendment protections for drag shows
“I’ve never backed down from a fight in my life, and I don’t plan to start now. I took an oath to defend the Constitution. Now, it’s time to stand up for it again.” — FIRE plaintiff Monica Meeks
Tennessee state employee sues after unlawful firing for Charlie Kirk post
FIRE filed a federal lawsuit this week on behalf of Monica Meeks, a Tennessee public employee and combat veteran who was fired from her state government job solely for criticizing Charlie Kirk in a Facebook comment after his assassination. Monica’s post was never intended to go further than two friends amiably sparring over politics — as millions of Americans do every day. But the post escaped her personal circle, and she quickly became swept up in the wave of cancellation attempts that followed the Kirk assassination. Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance Commissioner Carter Lawrence publicly announced her firing mere hours later, and sent a termination letter to Monica’s inbox.
However, under the First Amendment, public employers (like the state of Tennessee) can’t fire people simply because the government doesn’t approve of their off-duty speech. FIRE is asking a federal court to find that Lawrence retaliated against Monica for exercising her clearly established First Amendment rights, and to award her damages and reinstate her to her position. And because Lawrence clearly disregarded her constitutional rights, FIRE is also seeking punitive damages for Monica.
Free speech advocates rally to support FIRE’s defense of First Amendment protections for drag shows
At West Texas A&M, Legacy Hall is an open forum for students and the public to interact and engage in expression. One student organization, Spectrum WT, hosts a wide range of campus events, both social and educational, to raise awareness of issues important to LGBTQ+ students and foster a strong sense of community and acceptance. But when Spectrum WT began planning a charity drag performance to benefit an organization dedicated to suicide prevention in the LGBTQ+ community, West Texas A&M President Walter Wendler canceled the event, stating the university “will not host a drag show on campus” even while conceding that drag performance is “artistic expression” and that “the law of the land” requires him to let the show go on. According to Wendler, he opposes drag’s underlying “ideology,” believing it “demeans” women and that there is “no such thing” as a “harmless drag show.”
That’s when FIRE stepped in. Our country’s universities are bastions of free expression, exploration, and self-discovery. They are uniquely places where young adults may have their opinions tested and viewpoints expanded. And the Constitution prohibits university officials from censoring student expression on campus because they happen to disagree with its underlying message. Last week, a bipartisan coalition of university professors, prominent legal scholars, and no fewer than thirteen organizations filed five amicus briefs in support of Spectrum WT.
Below the fold
Trinity College bans political activism after individuals identifying with Students and Faculty for Justice in Palestine left chalkboard messages around campus (while classes were out of session) that included, “Trinity is suppressing freedom of assembly,” “Disclose Divest Protest,” “Trinity Invests in Genocide,” “You are on stolen land,” and “Free Palestine.”
The Trump administration announced that it would require foreign tourists to provide five years of social media history to enter the United States. Americans have 60 days to comment on the proposal. FIRE plans to publish a formal comment outlining why this is a serious threat to free expression.
In the frame
FIRE answers your questions in the latest episode of the “So to Speak” podcast. Hear our takes on changes at the Pentagon, Charlie Kirk and cancel culture, free speech and misinformation, globalized censorship, Indiana University, how to support FIRE, and more! Featuring FIRE President & CEO Greg Lukianoff, Executive Vice President Nico Perrino, COO Alisha Glennon, and Legal Director Will Creeley.
Know your rights: Satire, parody, and the First Amendment
In 1983, Hustler Magazine ran a parody of a famous Campari Liqueur ad, and it led to years of litigation involving the late Reverend Jerry Falwell, culminating with the landmark Supreme Court case Hustler Magazine v. Falwell in 1988.
The original Campari ads featured celebrities interviewed about their “first time,” a sexual double entendre for the first time they sampled Campari. Hustler’s parody implied that Falwell’s “first time” was in an outhouse with his mother, which enraged Falwell. Within days, he sued Hustler for intentional infliction of emotional distress and libel. A federal jury awarded Falwell damages on the former claim (which the appellate court upheld). The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, and in a unanimous decision held the First Amendment’s protections for freedom of speech extend to such patently offensive statements about public figures. However, there are some legal limits to satire and parody, especially when it comes to copyright and trademark law.