In a move that highlights the growing intersection of professional conduct and online speech, Perkins Coie, one of the country’s largest and most respected BigLaw firms, has terminated an employee following a social media post about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The decision has sparked conversations across the legal industry about the limits of online expression, workplace policies, and the reputational risks law firms face in today’s digital environment.
The Incident
According to reports, the dismissed employee posted remarks shortly after news broke of Charlie Kirk’s fatal shooting, which occurred earlier this month. While the exact language of the post has not been publicly released, sources indicate that the comments were perceived as mocking or celebratory in tone.
Perkins Coie quickly investigated the post and determined it violated the firm’s professional standards. In a public statement, the firm emphasized that the employee’s remarks did not align with its values and expectations, noting that everyone at the firm is held to a high standard of professionalism — both in and out of the office.
A Firm Stance on Professional Conduct
Law firms, especially those with national and international clients, are increasingly sensitive to the reputational risks associated with controversial social media activity. Public posts by employees, particularly lawyers, can quickly go viral and create backlash against the firm, potentially affecting client relationships.
By acting swiftly, Perkins Coie sent a message that it will not tolerate public statements that could be seen as condoning violence or inflaming political tensions. This aligns with a broader trend across BigLaw: firms are putting renewed focus on social media guidelines, internal training, and disciplinary policies to prevent reputational harm.
A Broader Pattern Across Industries
Perkins Coie is not alone in taking action. In the days following Kirk’s assassination, multiple employers across various sectors have disciplined or terminated staff over social media posts related to the incident.
- Nasdaq fired a junior strategist for posts that appeared to celebrate the attack.
- Delta Air Lines, Office Depot, and several universities have taken similar steps against employees whose comments were widely viewed as inappropriate.
- Even professional sports organizations, like the Carolina Panthers, have dismissed staff over posts regarding Kirk’s death.
This wave of employment actions shows how sensitive companies have become to online speech that crosses a line, particularly when it touches on politically charged violence.
Legal and Ethical Dimensions
From a legal perspective, private-sector employers in most states operate under “at-will” employment, meaning they can terminate employees for nearly any lawful reason — including conduct outside of work. While some states offer limited protections for political speech or lawful off-duty activities, those protections generally do not extend to speech perceived as hateful, violent, or harmful to the employer’s reputation.
For attorneys, there is an added layer of ethical responsibility. Lawyers are bound by professional rules that require them to uphold the integrity of the legal profession. Inappropriate public statements can raise questions about judgment and character, potentially impacting a lawyer’s standing with state bars.
Free Speech vs. Professional Responsibility
This incident also fuels an ongoing debate about the boundaries of free speech in the workplace. Some argue that employees should be allowed to express personal political views without fear of losing their jobs. Others counter that when speech appears to endorse violence or celebrate a public figure’s death, employers not only have the right but the obligation to act — especially when the employee’s identity is publicly tied to the organization.
For law firms, the balance is particularly delicate. BigLaw firms represent clients across the political spectrum, and their reputation for neutrality and professionalism is part of their value proposition. Any public comment by employees that risks alienating clients or drawing negative media attention can have serious business consequences.
Lessons for Legal Professionals
Perkins Coie’s decision serves as a cautionary tale for lawyers and law students:
- Social media is public and permanent. Even “personal” posts can be screenshotted, shared, and linked to an employer.
- Firm reputation is paramount. Attorneys are expected to uphold not only legal but also ethical and professional standards.
- Know your policies. Most firms have detailed codes of conduct and social media guidelines. Violating them can result in discipline or termination.
- Be mindful during high-profile events. Posting in the heat of the moment — particularly about politically charged tragedies — carries significant professional risk.
The Road Ahead
The Perkins Coie firing may not be the last of its kind. As the legal industry continues to grapple with political polarization and the speed of online discourse, more firms are likely to revisit their employee conduct policies and implement stricter enforcement.
For attorneys, the takeaway is clear: the line between private expression and professional image is increasingly blurred. Maintaining professionalism online is no longer optional — it is essential to preserving one’s career, reputation, and client relationships.
🔎 Protect Your Career – Find the Right Fit Today
Stories like this are a reminder that professional reputation matters more than ever. If you’re considering a fresh start or seeking a firm that aligns with your values, visit LawCrossing — the nation’s most comprehensive legal job board.
With thousands of exclusive opportunities updated daily, LawCrossing helps attorneys and legal professionals explore firms, compare cultures, and take control of their career paths.