The University of Tennessee System Board of Trustees has approved a $1.9 million settlement for Tamar Shirinian, a former assistant professor who was terminated after posting celebratory comments regarding the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The decision, reached on Monday, brings to a close a legal battle initiated by Shirinian, who contended that her constitutional rights were violated when the university disciplined and subsequently fired her.
"My client is pleased that the parties reached a resolution. Litigation is always difficult, and we’re grateful to everyone on both sides who worked diligently to bring this matter to a close." — Robb Bigelow, Attorney for Tamar Shirinian
Shirinian's termination stemmed from social media posts she made following the death of Charlie Kirk on September 10. Kirk, a nationally recognized conservative youth organizer, was shot and killed while addressing a crowd during his "American Comeback Tour" stop at Utah Valley University. His assassination sent shockwaves through conservative circles and ignited widespread debate across college campuses and beyond regarding free speech and professional conduct.
In her posts, Shirinian referred to Kirk as a "disgusting psychopath" and asserted that "The world is better off without him in it." She further commented on Kirk's family, writing, "his kids are better off living in a world without a disgusting psychopath like him and his wife, well, she’s a sick f— for marrying him so I dont [sic] care about her feelings." These remarks quickly drew public scrutiny, prompting the university to place her on administrative leave.
Facing mounting pressure, Shirinian later issued an apology, describing her comments as "insensitive" and "uncharacteristic of me as a person." However, the apology did not prevent her termination. On February 11, the university formally ended her employment. Chancellor Donde Plowman outlined the university's rationale in a termination letter to Shirinian, stating that her "words celebrated a gruesome murder, which horrifically took place on a college campus similar to our own." Plowman further accused Shirinian of "callously demean[ing] the grief and loss felt by the widow and young children of the victim while also mocking any grief felt by others who sympathized with the surviving family."
Shirinian responded to her dismissal by filing a lawsuit, arguing that the university had infringed upon her First Amendment rights. The recent settlement, first reported by local outlet Knox News, resolves this legal challenge. While Shirinian will receive the substantial financial payout, she will not be returning to her position at the University of Tennessee.
Robb Bigelow, Shirinian's attorney, expressed satisfaction with the outcome. In comments to Knox News, Bigelow stated, "My client is pleased that the parties reached a resolution. Litigation is always difficult, and we’re grateful to everyone on both sides who worked diligently to bring this matter to a close." He added that the settlement "reflects the seriousness of the issues while allowing everyone to move forward," conveying well wishes to the university for its future endeavors.
The University of Tennessee System maintained a brief public stance on the matter. When contacted by Fox News Digital, a university spokesperson offered only, "We do not have a comment outside of what was publicly said in the board meeting yesterday," directing inquiries to a recording of the board meeting where the settlement was approved.
This $1.9 million payout stands as one of the largest known settlements linked to the aftermath of reactions to Kirk’s assassination among university employees nationwide. Kirk's death spurred intense debate across academic institutions and broader society, forcing numerous employers to grapple with how to address staff who publicly condoned or derided his killing. His role as a prominent figure in conservative youth activism meant his death and the subsequent reactions became a national talking point, particularly concerning the boundaries of free speech for individuals employed by taxpayer-funded institutions.
Shirinian’s case became a central flashpoint in this larger discussion, highlighting the tension between claims of protected speech and a public university’s authority to regulate the conduct of its faculty. While the settlement officially concludes the litigation, both parties have indicated a desire to move past the dispute. Nevertheless, the underlying questions regarding academic freedom, professional responsibility, and the limits of expression in a public institution remain a subject of ongoing national discourse. The board’s vote effectively closes the legal chapter, but the broader societal implications continue to resonate.
