A former University of Mississippi staffer who was fired for a post she shared in the aftermath of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s killing had her lawsuit over alleged constitutional rights violations dismissed.
Lauren Stokes, who formerly served as the university’s executive assistant for the vice chancellor, sued Ole Miss Chancellor Glenn Boyce for violating her First Amendment right to free speech when terminating her employment. U.S. District Judge Glen Davidson ruled Monday that Boyce is entitled to qualified immunity, a doctrine that shields government officials from being held personally liable for constitutional violations unless they explicitly broke the law.
“In sum, the overwhelming weight of relevant factors point to one result: the Plaintiff cannot rebut the Defendant’s qualified immunity defense because she cannot show her interest in her social media post outweighed the Defendant’s interest in the University’s efficient operation,” the judge wrote. “Having failed to show a violation of her constitutional rights or that the unlawfulness of the Defendant’s conduct was ‘clearly established at the time’ of the alleged misconduct, the Court finds the Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity and the Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claim against the Defendant in his individual capacity must be dismissed.”
Stokes became the subject of widespread scrutiny on social media for content she shared after Kirk was killed at a speaking event at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10. The post in question referred to Kirk as a “reimagined” Ku Klux Klan member and claimed his politics were responsible for school shootings, mass killings via gunfire, anti-abortion laws, and acts of brutality committed against racial minorities.
Stokes later apologized for the remarks, acknowledging that the post she shared was “not kind,” and that she looked forward to getting off the internet to “re-evaluate kindness, privacy, and respect for all.”
Stokes was promptly removed from her role at the university, with Boyce justifying her termination by stating that her comments “run completely counter” to the institution’s values of civility, fairness, and respecting the dignity of each person. Stokes, on the other hand, argues that she was the victim of an unlawful attempt by Boyce to have her and all university employees conform to a particular worldview, limiting their ability to speak and think freely.
“We live in a war of words. People’s lives are destroyed not by the things they did but by the things they said or did not say, even privately, after apologizing. A private employer might require its employees to confirm a point of view. But the state, acting through its university, cannot,” Stokes’ legal counsel contended in the lawsuit against Boyce. “By terminating Lauren for reposting the speech in question, the University says its employees must conform to a point of view. That ought to distress all of us. After all, today’s policed are tomorrow’s policemen. No state institution should purport to wield such power.”
The former Ole Miss employee argued that Boyce willfully violated her constitutional rights so that the university could avoid controversy. But while Ole Miss may have been able to escape a public relations nightmare by removing Stokes from the payroll, the former staffer asserted that her public firing caused her to face multiple avoidable challenges, particularly relating to her business.
Stokes and her husband, John, own Tarasque Cucina, a Mediterranean-inspired restaurant in Oxford. When Stokes’ initial social media repost went viral, masses flooded the internet with negative reviews for the eatery, tanking its overall star ranking on platforms like Yelp and Google Reviews.
Still, Judge Davidson found that Stokes neither adequately explained how her constitutional rights were violated nor demonstrated how Boyce broke the law in his capacity as chancellor. The judge’s ruling stands for now but could be appealed at a higher court.