Republicans Push to Establish “National Charlie Kirk Day”

Written on 09/18/2025
Alex Haynes, Editor-at-Large

Republican lawmakers have introduced a proposal to designate a national day in honor of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, who was fatally shot earlier this month.

What We Know:

  • GOP legislators, including Florida Rep. Jimmy Patronis and Sen. Rick Scott, are backing a resolution to establish “National Charlie Kirk Day.”

  • The proposal comes just days after Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, was shot and killed on September 10, 2025, during an event at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah.

  • Supporters have described Kirk as a patriot and devout Christian, framing the resolution as a tribute to his faith and service.

  • Critics point to a double standard: though Kirk’s rhetoric was deeply polarizing — often contradicting teachings of compassion, inclusivity, and humility common in many Christian doctrines — Republicans have largely bypassed those criticisms in favor of highlighting his legacy in faith and patriotism. (This is based on existing commentary and the contrast in public discourse.)

  • The resolution has been introduced but has not yet passed, and the specific date for the proposed observance is still under discussion.

  • The resolution, introduced by Congressman Jimmy Patronis and Senator Rick Scott, would move to designate October 14th—Kirk’s birthday—as a remembrance day for the late conservative activist.

  • October 14th is also the birthday of George Floyd, the 46-year-old Black man who was killed in 2020 after a white police officer, Derek Chauvin, pinned him to the ground with his knee for over nine minutes outside a corner store in Minneapolis.
  • Similar honorary days are often symbolic gestures rather than permanent federal holidays, requiring congressional approval to move forward.

As Republicans move to formalize a day in Kirk’s memory, the push highlights contrasts — between reverence and controversy, between religious/familial tributes and critical assessments of his public persona. The debate reflects deeper tensions over how we memorialize divisive figures in a polarized political era.

This is a developing story and will be updated here.