In a stunning reversal that has ignited fresh outrage among conservatives, the University of South Dakota (USD) has abandoned its effort to terminate art professor Michael Hook after he posted a vile, derogatory message mocking the recent assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk.
The decision, outlined in a letter from USD President Sheila Gestring, cites Hook’s supposed remorse, his 19-year service record, and the university’s “interest in efficient operations” as reasons for backing down.
This comes amid a broader wave of firings and investigations nationwide targeting public employees for insensitive comments following Kirk’s shocking murder last month.
Hours after Kirk’s death, Hook took to his personal Facebook account, where he was openly identified as a USD employee, to unleash a hateful tirade celebrating the political violence.
In the now-deleted post, Hook wrote: “Okay. I don’t give a flying f-ck about this Kirk person. Apparently he was a hate spreading Nazi. I wasn’t paying close enough attention to the idiotic right fringe to even know who he was.”
It got worse as Hook aimed at Kirk’s family, which included two very young children and his grieving wife.
Hook continued, “I’m sorry for his family that he was a hate spreading Nazi and got killed. I’m sure they deserved better. Maybe good people can now enter their lives.”
The post concluded, “I have no thoughts or prayers for this hate spreading Nazi. A shrug, maybe.”
The post quickly went viral after catching the attention of conservative watchdog accounts like Libs of TikTok, which blasted the comment as “disgusting” and called out USD for employing such an individual.
University of South Dakota professor Michael Hook:
“I don’t give a flying fuck about this Kirk person. Maybe good people can now enter their [Charlie’s family] lives. I have no thoughts or prayers for this hate spreading nazi.”
.@usd any comment?? https://t.co/rbCp9dF8zQ pic.twitter.com/crEJmtjjrA
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) September 12, 2025
Governor Larry Rhoden and state House Speaker Jon Hansen, both Republicans, publicly demanded Hook’s dismissal, describing the remarks as “hateful and vile” and unbecoming of a university representative.
Yesterday, I was made aware of these hateful and vile comments made by a University of South Dakota professor regarding the death of Charlie Kirk and Charlie’s family. I am disgusted by his remarks, and think they are unbecoming of someone who works for and represents our… pic.twitter.com/FIVa1OlGrM
— Speaker Jon Hansen (@SpeakerHansen) September 12, 2025
Hansen, in a post on X, stated he had contacted USD President Gestring to push for termination, emphasizing that such rhetoric directed at a “good man’s family who was recently assassinated will not be tolerated.”
This response fit into a larger pattern across the nation, where Republicans encouraged public tips on similar offensive posts, leading to dozens of firings and probes in state agencies, colleges, and school districts. Higher education alone saw numerous employees ousted for comments perceived as glorifying or downplaying Kirk’s murder.
Hook decided he wouldn’t take the firing laying down. He lawyered up and filed a federal lawsuit.
Late last month, U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier, a Clinton appointee, issued a temporary restraining order blocking the termination.
In her ruling, Schreier argued that Hook had spoken as a private citizen on a matter of public concern, entitling his speech to First Amendment protections.
Despite the ongoing legal battle, USD and the Board of Regents folded on October 3. President Gestring’s letter, released by Hook’s attorney, Jim Leach, formally withdrew the intent to terminate.
“We have taken into consideration your remorse for the post, your past record of service, and the university’s interest in efficient operations,” the letter read, according to a report from the South Dakota Searchlight.
Hook, in a statement, expressed relief, writing, “I am thrilled that I can continue teaching my students at the University of South Dakota. I love this work and this university as much now as when I came here 19 years ago. I hope the state now understands that the First Amendment prohibits it from punishing anyone for speech about public issues—no matter how much state or national leaders or others disagree with it.”
