Committee approves Charlie Kirk remembrance day after heated testimony

Representative Benaroche and Representative Weinberger presented HB 125 as a legislative response to political violence: "This bill is about what happens when violence replaces debate," the sponsor said, framing the measure as a condemnation of violence and a defense of free expression.

Public testimony was sharply divided. Opponents — including civil‑rights and community organizations — urged the committee not to memorialize a partisan, polarizing figure and questioned the selection of Kirk for a state‑level remembrance day. "Charlie Kirk referred to Dr. Martin Luther King as an awful person," a critic said, arguing that state recognition sends a message about whose values are elevated.

Supporters, including family and conservative organizations, described threats and harassment they said followed the assassination and urged the legislature to mark the violence against a speaker. "He was not a racist. He was not a transphobe," a proponent said.

A technical amendment clearing enacting language was adopted. After extensive debate and public testimony, the committee reported HB 125 favorably by roll call, 13 ayes and 5 nays.

Next steps: The bill will advance to the House with the committee substitute; continued debate on whether to use individual commemorations or broader 'Free Speech' recognition is likely on the floor.