The fallout from Charlie Kirk’s death has taken a sharp turn as right-wing influencers begin targeting people who spoke negatively about him online. Laura Loomer, Libs of TikTok, and other conservative voices have been calling out posts they claim were “disrespectful,” often tagging employers and encouraging companies to take action. Some of the people targeted have already lost their jobs.
Louisiana Rep Clay Higgens went even further, threatening that anyone who spoke out against Kirk could have their professional licenses revoked. It read, “If someone says something about Charlie Kirk that is disrespectful, I’m also going after their business licenses… licenses should be revoked.” Loomer has also vowed to “make everyone I find online who celebrates his death famous,” while Libs of TikTok has highlighted individuals to millions of followers, sparking campaigns that put people’s livelihoods at risk.
The tactic has had real consequences. A Carolina Panthers employee was fired after their social media post was shared by right-wing accounts. A university assistant dean was dismissed for his remarks. A television analyst was dropped after comments about Kirk spread online. Each case has fueled debate about whether this is accountability or simply retaliation.
The controversy exposes a contradiction. These same voices have long branded themselves as defenders of free speech, especially when conservatives are deplatformed or “canceled.” Yet now they are leading efforts to punish people for speech they dislike.
For everyday people, this should be a warning. In the current climate, one post can be screenshotted, amplified, and weaponized against you. Companies are quick to respond to outrage, and in some cases, even licenses could be on the line if political campaigns succeed. What some see as holding people accountable, others see as selective censorship.
The larger impact is clear. People may start self-censoring out of fear, companies may adopt stricter rules for employees’ online activity, and the line between free speech and punishment is becoming harder to define. The result is a chilling effect that proves free speech isn’t treated as universal. Instead, it’s defended loudly when one side is under fire, and swiftly ignored when the target is someone else.
The bottom line is that right-wing influencers like Laura Loomer and Libs of TikTok are showing that “free speech” has limits; limits that are enforced when the speech doesn’t align with their views. That contradiction is now at the center of the fight over what happened after Charlie Kirk’s death.
