The family of slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk has taken the first formal step toward legal action, alleging that Utah Valley Universitys negligence created the conditions that allowed a rooftop assassin to gun him down during a campus speech.
According to One America News, the Kirk family has filed a notice of claim with Utahs Office of the Attorney General, asserting that a series of stunning failures and reckless decisions by Utah Valley University (UVU) and state authorities left the 30-year-old Turning Point USA founder exposed to a fatal attack.
Submitted on September 9, just one day before the first anniversary of Kirks killing, the filing contends that his death was entirely preventable and the direct result of broken security promises and inadequate planning for a high-profile conservative speaker.
Charlie Kirk was violently and publicly assassinated while speaking at an event at Utah Valley University (UVU), attorney Brett Parkinson, counsel for the Kirk family, said in a statement to The Daily Wire.
His murder was entirely preventable and, in fact, would not have happened had the State of Utah and UVU followed through on their stated security promises, which included protecting the rooftops surrounding the quad where Charlie was speaking.
The notice of claim names the state of Utah, UVU, the UVU Police Department, UVU Police Chief Jeffrey Long, then-UVU President Astrid Tuminez and several other officials, accusing them of systemic security failures.
While the filing is not yet a formal lawsuit, it preserves the familys right to pursue litigation and seek accountability from public institutions that conservatives increasingly view as hostile or indifferent to their safety.
Kirk was shot less than half an hour into his first stop on Turning Point USAs The American Comeback tour when a bullet fired from a nearby rooftop struck his neck as he addressed an estimated crowd of 3,000.
The attack, carried out in broad daylight on a public campus, instantly became a chilling symbol of the escalating violence and intimidation directed at right-of-center voices in American public life.
Through a series of stunning failures and reckless decisions, the UVU Parties created a foreseeable danger to Charlie, the notice alleged, arguing that the university knew or should have known the risks associated with hosting a nationally prominent conservative figure.
Those decisions ultimately rendered Mr. Kirk helpless to the rooftop shooter in an assassination that could have been avoided had the UVU Parties only taken reasonable steps to plan and oversee a safe event, steps outlined below that have been standard practice for other universities hosting controversial speakers.
The claim asserts that Turning Point USA specifically warned UVU police about accessible rooftops overlooking the open-air venue where Kirk was scheduled to speak, only to be falsely reassured that the issue had been handled.
The organization said it received a message from a student warning that there was student roof access pretty close to where [Charlie Kirk] will be set up at the Sorensen Student Center, and when this concern was relayed to Chief Long, he replied, I got you covered.
The notice underscores that rooftop security was not a theoretical concern but a glaring vulnerability in a climate of rising political violence, especially against conservatives and high-profile Republicans.
Mr. Kirks visit occurred when political violence had hit a fever pitch, it read, pointing to recent incidents that should have prompted heightened vigilance from campus and state authorities.
Famously, President Trump was shot by a rooftop sniper during the 2024 presidential campaign.
Another would-be assassin of President Trump was intercepted on a golf course only two months later, the filing continued. Congresswoman Nancy Pelosis (D-Calif.) husband was brutally attacked in their California home. And a state legislator and her husband were ruthlessly murdered in their home in Minnesota. It was in this environment political danger that the UVU Parties chose to host Charlie and the Tour.
Despite this backdrop, the notice alleges that UVU failed to implement even basic modern security measures, including real-time CCTV monitoring of rooftops and aerial surveillance.
It notes that later video footage clearly showed the shooter moving across a rooftop before the attack, yet there was no active monitoring, no deployment of drones to scan elevated positions, and no written security plan guiding the UVU police response.
Days after the assassination, UVU publicly announced that it would launch a comprehensive independent review of the incident with an external organization, a move critics say came only after the worst had already happened.
We believe the findings of the comprehensive, third-party independent review of this targeted act of violence will offer valuable insights on how college campuses improve response and preparedness moving forward, Tuminez said at the time. We will integrate the findings into our efforts to strengthen and improve safety practices for UVU and all of Utah higher education.
For Kirks family and many conservatives, the central question now is whether public universities and state officials will finally be held to account when they fail to protect right-leaning speakers from foreseeable threats.
The notice of claim signals that the Kirks are prepared to test that question in court, pressing a broader debate over whether Americas institutions will defend free speech and equal protection for conservatives with the same urgency they claim to show everyone else.
Login