Leaders of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute urged campus conservatives not to retreat from public debate after the fatal shooting of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, saying in a New York Post opinion piece that students and organizations must continue to host contentious speakers and take steps to ensure safety and documentation.
John A. Burtka IV, ISI president and CEO, and Marlo Slayback, executive director of ISI’s Collegiate Network journalism program, framed Kirk’s death as a warning about what they described as growing intolerance for conservative viewpoints on college campuses. They argued that the shooting — which occurred after Kirk walked onto a college campus to speak and was later pronounced dead — should not deter conservative students from organizing forums, debates and campus publications.
In the op-ed, the ISI leaders described Kirk’s death as the "horrific endpoint" of what they called a campus culture that treats conservative viewpoints as unacceptable, and they cited recent incidents to underscore their point. The piece referenced a 2023 event at the University of Pittsburgh, hosted by the ISI, during which demonstrators set off two homemade incendiary smoke devices as people waited to enter a debate featuring Michael Knowles and Brad Polumbo. The authors said several officers were injured in that incident and that two people were later convicted; that account was presented as context for their call to maintain robust speech norms despite threats and disruptions.
ISI said its Collegiate Network students attended the Turning Point USA event where Kirk was shot and reported on the scene in campus outlets. The organization said its programs support conservative students at hundreds of colleges by helping them found chapters and campus papers that it described as modeling "ordered liberty."
The op-ed also cited recent survey data to argue that campus tolerance for aggressive tactics is rising. It referred to a Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) student survey released days earlier, saying the poll found support for using violence to stop a campus speech had climbed to about one-third of respondents and that students exhibited lower tolerance for conservative speakers than for progressive ones. Burtka and Slayback said those trends create a "combustible environment" for high-profile conservative figures.
The ISI leaders urged students to respond to the shooting with what they described as solidarity and transparency rather than retreat. They recommended that student groups co-sponsor events with organizations such as ISI, create debate societies and civil-liberties groups, enlist allied faculty across disciplines, work closely with campus security to vet procedures, and document incidents so campus officials can address misconduct through appropriate channels.
Burtka and Slayback also described Kirk’s signature "Prove Me Wrong" format as emblematic of his approach, saying he invited hostile questions and created spaces in which admitting error and learning could be signs of intellectual growth. They called that approach a potential model for students seeking to maintain open inquiry in the aftermath of the shooting.
News organizations and campus authorities are continuing to report on security, free-speech debates and the political repercussions of the shooting. The ISI op-ed framed its recommendations as practical steps to preserve lawful speech and the right to hear it without being silenced by violence or intimidation.
The New York Post published the opinion piece on Sept. 12. The ISI leaders' remarks join a broader national conversation about safety at campus events, the policing of speech, and how colleges and student organizations should balance security with the protection of controversial but lawful expression. Official law-enforcement findings, ongoing investigations, and campus policy responses continue to develop.