The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has filed a lawsuit to defend Georgia teacher Michelle Mickens’ free speech rights, following her post that criticized Charlie Kirk, a founding figure of Turning Point USA, who was assassinated in September. Mickens, a 2022 Georgia Teacher of the Year finalist, was placed on indefinite leave and urged to resign for posting the statement, which included the line, ‘While I’m sad that we live in a country where gun violence is an epidemic, the world is a bit safer without him. I didn’t respect him at all, and he’s part of the hatred and vitriolic language we hear so much now. I pray that without him, people can be kinder and more tolerant to one another.’
The lawsuit is being filed by the SPLC and the Georgia Association of Educators, which allege that Mickens’ First Amendment rights were violated. According to the complaint, her post was shared with her school by a former classmate, leading to her indefinite suspension pending termination. The SPLC is seeking to have Mickens reinstated, along with compensation for lost wages, emotional distress, and other damages. The organization’s statement emphasizes that this case is about resisting the growing attempts to exert ideological control over public education, and that Mickens is being targeted for her personal beliefs, not for any policy violation or harm to students.
In response, Beverley Levine, superintendent of Oglethorpe County School System, stated that the school district is confident in its ability to prevail in the litigation. While acknowledging that some facts in the lawsuit may be inaccurate, the district prefers to litigate the issues in federal court rather than in the public or press. The case highlights the broader debate over the limits of free speech in educational institutions and the potential impact on teachers’ personal expressions.
The SPLC referred Fox News Digital to a statement from Michael Tafelski, interim deputy legal director at the SPLC, saying that Mickens is being ‘targeted’ for her personal beliefs. ‘This case is about resisting the growing attempts to exert ideological control over public education,’ Tafelski said. ‘Ms. Mickens is being targeted not because she violated any policy or harmed students, but because her personal views — expressed outside of the classroom — don’t align with those in power. This unconstitutional censorship of protected speech endangers a healthy democracy. We look forward to defending Ms. Mickens to ensure she can continue serving her students, as she has for decades, without fear of politically motivated retaliation.’
Other instances of teachers facing disciplinary action for expressing views on public issues include a Florida teacher who claimed he was forced to remove a Charlie Kirk poster from his classroom after a student complaint, and a New York teacher who was suspended after celebrating Kirk’s assassination with the comment, ‘Good riddance to bad garbage.’ These cases illustrate the broader tensions between free speech rights and the responsibilities of educators in a public school system.