The family of Charlie Kirk faces a formidable legal challenge in their pursuit of justice against Utah Valley University, as the state’s expansive government immunity statute may shield the institution from liability despite allegations of serious security failures preceding Kirk’s assassination.
Attorneys representing Kirk’s family filed a notice of intent to sue on September 9th, one day before the first anniversary of the conservative activist’s death. The legal filing outlines what the family characterizes as a cascade of security lapses by university officials, including the rejection of additional police protection, inadequate response to concerns raised by Kirk’s security team, and the absence of a comprehensive security protocol for his campus visit.
However, legal scholars and practicing attorneys agree that Utah’s statutory framework presents nearly insurmountable obstacles for the Kirk family’s case.
Teneille Brown, a law professor at the University of Utah, provided a sobering assessment of the family’s prospects. Utah law extends broad immunity to government entities and their employees across an extensive range of circumstances. These protections encompass discretionary functions, as well as claims involving assault, battery, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and civil rights violations.
“Unfortunately, Charlie Kirk’s family is going to have a very difficult time prevailing in a wrongful death case in Utah,” Brown explained. “And that’s because Utah’s government immunity statute is phrased in such a way that says even if the state and UVU were reckless, they retain immunity in cases that arise out of a battery, and that would include gunshot wounds.”
The legal framework places the Kirk family in the troubling position of potentially being unable to secure accountability even if they can demonstrate reckless conduct by university officials.
Kirk, who was thirty-one years old at the time of his death, co-founded Turning Point USA in 2012. Under his leadership, the organization grew into a significant presence on high school and college campuses across the nation, advocating for conservative principles among young Americans. He was shot and killed while speaking at Utah Valley University in Orem on September 10th, 2025.
Neama Rahmani, president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, confirmed that wrongful death claims against government entities present inherent difficulties for plaintiffs. Government bodies typically enjoy substantial immunity from lawsuits stemming from assaults or batteries committed by third parties.
“I’ve handled lack of security cases, including lack of security cases against the government,” Rahmani said. “They are tough because you are trying to hold the police or city, county or state responsible for someone else’s criminal actions.”
Despite these challenges, Rahmani identified what may be the Kirk family’s strongest piece of evidence. A message from UVU Police Chief Jeffrey Long acknowledged concerns about rooftop access to the Sorenson Center, a building located in close proximity to Kirk’s speaking venue. The Sorenson Center sits directly west of the Losee Center, where prosecutors allege Tyler Robinson fired the fatal shot.
In his message to Kirk’s security team regarding these concerns, Chief Long wrote, “I got you cove”—a communication that appears to have been cut off but suggests assurances were provided that proved tragically insufficient.
The question now before Utah’s legal system is whether the state’s immunity provisions should protect government institutions even when foreseeable dangers were identified but not adequately addressed. For the Kirk family, the answer to that question will determine whether they can hold anyone accountable for a security failure with fatal consequences.
Related: Rideshare Driver Facing Rape Charges in Maryland Had History of Sexual Assault Allegations
