Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said Tuesday that “hate speech” is protected by the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment but argued that people who celebrated the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk should face noncriminal consequences such as termination or expulsion.
Cruz made the remarks at Politico’s AI & Tech Summit, saying the First Amendment "absolutely protects speech" — including "vile," "horrible" and "hate" speech — and that protection means such expression cannot be prosecuted even when it is "evil and bigoted and wrong." He added that employers, schools and other institutions should act against people who publicly celebrated the murder.
Cruz’s comments followed a public dispute over how authorities should respond to online reactions after Kirk was shot and killed last week during an event at Utah Valley University. Several people across the country have been dismissed from jobs after posting messages that appeared to celebrate the slaying.
The senator’s stance put him at odds with Attorney General Pam Bondi, who on Monday said the Justice Department would "absolutely" target people who engaged in "hate speech" in the wake of Kirk’s assassination. Bondi later clarified that hate speech that "crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment," adding on X that such conduct "is a crime." She wrote that authorities would pursue those making threats and accused the "radical left" of normalizing calls for political violence.
Asked about Bondi’s initial comments, President Donald Trump told reporters the department should potentially go after journalists who "treat me unfairly," a remark that came as the White House and conservative figures criticized what they called a double standard in responses to political violence and rhetoric.
Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, had himself written last year that "hate speech does not exist legally in America," saying all speech — including "ugly," "gross" and "evil" speech — is protected by the First Amendment. In his Politico remarks, Cruz cited English philosopher John Stuart Mill in urging "naming and shaming" and what he described as social consequences rather than criminal prosecution.
Legal doctrine generally draws distinctions between protected speech and categories such as true threats or incitement, which are not protected by the First Amendment. Bondi’s clarification framed her office’s enforcement focus on statements that cross into threats or solicitations of violence.
Cruz called for public and institutional accountability for those celebrating the murder, saying such actions should "absolutely face the consequences for celebrating murder." He emphasized that criminal prosecution is not an appropriate response to speech that, while abhorrent, does not meet the legal threshold for unprotected categories.
The episode has intensified debate within conservative circles over how to balance First Amendment protections with efforts to address violent rhetoric and social-media reactions to political events. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
