The American right-wing argued that free speech was inviolable – until the incident involving Charlie Kirk’s assassination | The Charlie Kirk murdering

In the wake of the murder of Charlie Kirk, a conservative youth activist and ally of Donald Trump, the United States is embroiled in a heated debate concerning the intersection of political speech and violence. The US attorney general has announced a clampdown on “hate speech” regarding Kirk, suggesting even a print shop worker refusing to print flyers in his memory could face prosecution. Critics argue this policy may undermine the protection of free speech unless speech incites immediate violence.

The conservative stance has shifted remarkably from previous complaints about a leftwing “cancel culture.” Now, many conservatives seem to embrace a “consequence culture,” where speech is not intraperitoneal. The implications are boundless, with conservatives advocating for the dismissal of individuals critical of Kirk’s views, and administration officials contemplating an executive order to combat political violence and hate speech.

While some argue that the suspensions and firings of those who mocked Kirk are private employer decisions, the government’s role in this enforced silence is contentious. Critics contend that the curtailment of speech goes against fundamental First Amendment values and sets a dangerous precedent for future political dissent.