Austin, Texas — A major teachers union has taken legal action against state education officials, claiming constitutional rights violations
The Texas chapter of the American Federation of Teachers (Texas AFT) filed a federal lawsuit on Tuesday against the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and Commissioner Mike Morath, seeking to stop state-led inquiries into public school educators’ social media activity following the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The union argues that these probes infringe on teachers’ free-speech protections and have led to disciplinary actions, including administrative leave, reprimands and terminations.
Union Challenges Investigations That Followed Charlie Kirk’s Death
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Austin, centers on a September letter from the TEA that urged school districts to report teachers who had allegedly shared “reprehensible and inappropriate content” on social platforms in response to Kirk’s murder. In the months since, more than 350 educators were reported, and at least 95 complaints remain under review, the union says.
Texas AFT President Zeph Capo and national AFT President Randi Weingarten argue the directive was vague, lacked clear standards and failed to protect educators’ due-process rights. The union contends that many of the questioned posts were made on personal accounts outside classroom duties and did not disrupt school operations.
Retaliation Alleged, Free Speech Protections at Heart of Case
Union leaders assert that the state’s approach has created a climate of fear among educators, chilling legitimate expression on matters of public concern. Some teachers faced professional consequences, from placement on administrative leave to job loss, after their online commentary drew complaints.
While the TEA declined to comment on pending litigation, the lawsuit calls on the court to block enforcement of the reporting policy and clarify that personal political speech by educators is protected under the First Amendment. The union is not seeking monetary damages, but instead aims to overturn what it describes as an unconstitutional investigation regime.
