Teacher’s assistant claims wrongful termination over Charlie Kirk social media post
By Stephanie Moore, Caitlin Ashbaugh
Click here for updates on this story
SPARTANBURG COUNTY, South Carolina (WXII) — Lauren Vaughn, a former teacher’s assistant in Spartanburg County, South Carolina, has filed a lawsuit against the school district, its board of trustees, and its superintendent, alleging she was wrongfully terminated over a Facebook post made in her personal time.
The lawsuit states that Vaughn’s post was made on Sept. 10, the day of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s death, and included a quote from Kirk: “I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational.” Vaughn added “Thoughts and prayers” to Kirk’s quote in the post.
Vaughn continued the conversation in the comments, stating, “I disagree with Kirk and think today should not have happened. I’m sorry it did.” Another read: [T]he WHOLE point here is that any time someone is killed fits [sic] a tragedy. Even someone I may not like. Even someone I disagree with. But instead of accepting it, why don’t we do something about it?”
The lawsuit claims she further stated, “She felt no satisfaction here. Just heartbreak for anyone and everyone affected by gun violence and a hope that one day, enough will be enough. At the end of the day, all want the same thing—for everyone to be safe in their school, home, church, in a public place, at a rally or event, or just out in public.”
The post was deleted later that evening, according to the lawsuit.
“The comments she made were not unprofessional, and they weren’t inflammatory, and there was nothing wrong with her comments. In fact, she quoted Mr. Kirk, his own stance, and offered commentary,” Vaughn’s lead attorney, Jack Cohoon of Burnette Shutt and McDaniel law, said. “Miss Vaughn was just using her First Amendment rights and was not engaging in anything that could reasonably be construed as disruptive.”
The lawsuit accuses the district’s social media guidelines of being unconstitutional, overly broad, vague, and viewpoint-discriminatory. It claims the guidelines ask employees to “be respectful and professional in all communications, by word, image or other means, always representing the district in the best light.”
Vaughn and her attorneys accuse District 5, its board of trustees, and the superintendent of violating the First Amendment, the South Carolina Constitution, and wrongful discharge in violation of public policy. Vaughn is demanding a trial by jury.
“The First Amendment is designed to protect unpopular speech. If it only protected popular speech, it wouldn’t be. It wouldn’t be necessary,” Cohoon said. “There are no absolutes in this situation. But at the same time, in this case, it illustrates that the employer cannot just say you spoke about something that makes us uncomfortable and terminate the person, which is what happened. At the same time, employees do have to be aware that things they say if the employer can claim that, can plausibly claim and prove that they were disruptive.”
Cohoon continued, claiming social media policies should be reviewed for “overbroad” statutes and conversations could be more open to include law or legislation in the broadening effects of social media and technology use in speech or censorship.
“People need to realize that it’s there, that when they put things to social media, it exists. Sometimes it goes beyond, you know, where they intend. Having said that, it’s important that there be protections for people to engage as citizens,” Vaughn said. “This seems to be a hot-button issue at this very moment in a way that I’ve never seen before with regard to freedom of expression, and maybe this is going to prompt conversations about how to better protect individuals’ ability to express themselves. But my concern is that it might create an environment where there’s more restrictions rather than less with regard to people being able to express themselves.”
WYFF News 4 has reached out to Spartanburg School District Five for a comment. The district responded with a statement:
“We are aware of the lawsuit, but cannot comment on pending litigation,” a District 5 Spokesperson said.
The full lawsuit can be read here.
Please note: This content carries a strict local market embargo. If you share the same market as the contributor of this article, you may not use it on any platform.