On Wednesday, September 10th, 2025, far-right influencer Charlie Kirk was shot at Utah Valley University. With America’s eyes glued to their social media feeds and “live updates” news articles, he died, leaving behind a wife and two young children.
On Thursday, September 18th, 2025, almost two dozen Ursinus students gathered outside Upper Wismer and in the Bear’s Den to protest a Celebration of Life in Kirk’s name. I was one of them.
Organization had come together quickly: the UC Republicans – the hosting club – announced the event by email on the afternoon of the 16th, and, hours later, I was invited to join the protest. By the morning of the 17th, I was spreading the word about the sign-making and planning meeting that evening. One message – which would later be printed onto the pamphlets we handed out – remained, to my knowledge, central: a memorial should be allowed; platforming hate speech on-campus by “streaming… some of Charlie Kirk’s videos” (as stated by the announcement email) shouldn’t.
That tenet became the first of the three rules I repeated to myself as the protest began. First: our only issue is with hate speech. Second: do not disrupt; our protest was explicitly to be a silent one. Third: above all, keep others safe. Several of the other protestors were dear friends of mine; I at once reminded myself of my admittedly paranoid tendencies, and prepared for the worst. I’d opted to be one of the protesters to sit inside of the event, while the rest of our group remained just outside the entrance. We’d remind those hosting the event that there would be dissident witnesses to anything they played; those outside would demonstrate that not all students stand for Kirk’s rhetoric, and that marginalized students are safe here. And so, to reactions ranging from whispers asking whether we were allowed inside, to greetings, to outright laughter, I and the rest of the “inside team” sat first-row before the projector at the event, entirely silent.
Very quickly, it was made clear that my second rule – do not disrupt – was, apparently, insufficient. Head of Campus Safety Joe Nemic approached the front of the room and explained that the Bear’s Den was reserved; to remain, in protest, would be to accept responsibility for a Student Conduct Violation and agree to stand for a hearing, despite the clear and repeated proclamations by the UC Republicans that the event was “open to all” and the fact that we’d been greeted and offered food as we entered. In that moment, I couldn’t help but question if I’d known what I’d gotten myself into. I’m at Ursinus on scholarship; I dream daily of grad school. How would I explain a conduct violation to my scholarship advisor? On a grad school application?
My concern was, apparently, visible; one of the other protesters quirked an eyebrow – a silent “Are we staying?” I nodded as similar communication flashed between the other participants, in eye contact and in nods: “Yes, we’re staying. All of us.”
Nemic took the resultant silence as confirmation that we were, in fact, accepting the risk, and left the room, announcing his intent to alert Dean Atkins. Meanwhile, one of the hosts of the event took to the podium and flicked quickly and silently through a brief slideshow dedicated to Kirk, opening the floor to a handful of memorial comments, during which one protestor silently stood in front of the screen with their sign, before playing several of Kirk’s videos, featuring a wide sampling of his views. Without dedicating an excess of page space to his opinions, in one instance, Kirk suggested that women are, on average, inherently poorer engineers than men, and that Black culture promotes crime. The next, he argued that trans women are men in dresses with malintent towards children. He claimed – entirely falsely – that Haitian immigrants eat pets. In short, the views featured were of exactly the nature we’d intended to protest.
As it stands at time of writing, no one involved in the protest that day has been contacted for disciplinary action, nor have we received follow-up of any sort from Campus Safety. (The Grizzly, however, reached out; the administration explained that there was confusion among Campus Safety officers about whether the event was public or private, and that because all were welcome, the protesters were permitted to be there.) So far as has been publicly addressed, the UC Republicans’ choice of videos and our protest have resulted in no conversations about changes to campus policy. Yet, I cannot help but feel that our protest was a successful one; after the event, our “outside team” reported a great deal of public support, and that they’d handed out approximately 150 pamphlets with our message and resources for support for marginalized students. There now stands a community of students on campus who I may approach for future organization; furthermore, I feel that I can trust them and seek their support in times of personal need, as a marginalized student myself. I am confident that, if we did nothing else, there must be at least one student on campus who feels a little bit safer because we were there, standing up for them, and I can think of no higher achievement.