Nearly two dozen residents packed Tuesday’s St. Louis County Council meeting, divided sharply over whether assassinated right-wing provocateur Charlie Kirk should be honored by a body that represents the county’s entire diverse population.
In the end, the council rejected a resolution by Republican Councilman Mark Harder of District 6 that sought to recognize Kirk’s “commitment to truth, freedom and constitutional principles” and to denounce the political violence that ended his life. The debate stretched well beyond the usual procedure, becoming a referendum on Kirk’s polarizing legacy: Some cast him as a defender of free speech, while others painted him as a racist, misogynistic hatemonger.
Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, built a following in this country and beyond by mobilizing young conservatives, especially on college campuses. His rallies and campus tours helped fuel Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement and his winning presidential campaign, but his inflammatory rhetoric on gun rights, abortion, DEI, immigration and other issues often sparked outrage.
Kirk was fatally shot last week while addressing a large outdoor audience at Utah Valley University. The 22-year-old suspect, Tyler Robinson, is being held without bail. He faces several charges, including aggravated murder, felony discharge of a firearm and obstruction of justice.
County Executive Sam Page condemned Kirk’s killing but refused to back the resolution, saying Kirk’s views were “very different from mine” and that the right-wing influencer fueled “widespread anxiety.”
One speaker who said he knew Kirk personally argued that the resolution was less about endorsing his politics than about rejecting political violence. Another credited Kirk with teaching him “it was OK to disagree with other people.”
Opponents pushed back hard.
“Charlie Kirk lived by the sword and died by the sword,” one Black resident said, accusing Kirk of insulting African Americans, including Martin Luther King Jr., George Floyd and Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
A woman addressing council members called Kirk “a force for good” and challenged anyone who thought him “racist” to consider “his close friendship with Candace Owens, who is a conservative Black woman,” she said.
Another woman, who said she was from the 63141 ZIP code, rebutted that statement.
“It is gross and inappropriate to honor someone who left behind a legacy of hate,” she said, then listed comments Kirk had hurled at people of color and women. “Charlie Kirk repeatedly used his platform to attack minorities in this country. … His words spread division, and God does not teach hate.”
Others countered that the resolution symbolized core American ideals. “It’s not an endorsement of Kirk,” one woman said. “It’s an endorsement of life, liberty, freedom of speech and the pursuit of happiness.”
St. Louis County NAACP President John Bowman reiterated the group’s earlier statement condemning Kirk’s record as one that “undermined civil rights, dismissed the struggles of marginalized communities, disrespected African American women and spread division.”
Pastor Edmund Lowe, presiding Elder of the St. Louis Cape Girardeau District, was even more blunt: “In all my life, I have never heard, nor have I ever seen anyone be as foul as Charlie Kirk,” he told council members, urging them not to “lift him up.”
Harder, the bill’s sponsor, insisted critics misunderstood his intent. Many, he said, made “snap judgments” without reading the resolution. While it recognized Kirk’s short life, Harder said, it was also meant to honor “the unyielding right to speak truth to power, to celebrate achievement and honor those who dare to challenge the status quo.”
Democratic Councilwoman Shalonda D. Webb of District 4 said she wrestled with what Kirk “had and had not done” during his short life. “I went to his site to hear things he had been saying for years — not just recently — but for years … and he has never denounced the things he’s said that were hateful. My heart goes out to his wife, his children and all those who championed for him,” Webb continued, adding, “but I cannot go along with and help let someone be championed or go down in history without seeing the whole picture. So, I will not be supporting this resolution.”
Councilwoman Lisa Clancy of District 5 also said she couldn’t support the bill. “I want to make it very clear that I denounce all violence, including political violence, and the murder of Charlie Kirk never should have happened,” said Clancy, a Democrat.
She then shifted to the broader topic of rampant gun violence, reciting several recent shootings, including one last week at Evergreen High School in Colorado, where a student fired 20 rounds in nine minutes, injuring two schoolmates before fatally shooting himself.
It is “obviously past time for some common-sense gun safety laws,” Clancy said, adding that the resolution goes far beyond just condemning violence. Challenging Harder’s statement that the resolution doesn’t honor Kirk, Clancy read a section that specifically states it honors his “life and legacy.”
“And that’s where I have to voice my strong opposition,” Clancy said before voting against the resolution. “His death should be mourned, but his ideas as he expressed them do not deserve the honor of this council.”
Democratic Councilwoman Gretchen Bangert of District 2 also condemned the violence that ended Kirk’s life but said she could not support the resolution. “My responsibility as a council member is to make sure the individuals we recognize embody the values of unity, respect and inclusivity of all who call St. Louis County home.”
In the end, four Democrats and one Republican on the seven-member council voted against Harder’s resolution.
Sylvester Brown Jr. is the Deaconess Foundation Community Advocacy Fellow.