Police Chief’s Text Takes Center Stage as Charlie Kirk’s Family Warns University of Possible Lawsuit
Charlie Kirk’s family has taken the first formal step toward potentially suing Utah Valley University and state officials over security failures they allege contributed to the conservative activist’s assassination.
A notice of claim filed September 9 names UVU, the State of Utah, campus police, and officials involved in planning security for Kirk’s appearance. Such a filing is generally required before certain wrongful-death claims may proceed against government entities in Utah.
The university has not admitted liability for the September 10, 2025, shooting.
Kirk’s widow, Erika Kirk, and their two children are listed as prospective plaintiffs. Potential claims could also involve Kirk’s parents. Although the notice does not specify an amount, the family’s attorneys say the damages could be substantial.
Kirk, 31, was addressing approximately 3,000 people at a Turning Point USA American Comeback Tour event when he was fatally shot. Authorities say the gunfire originated from the roof of UVU’s Losee Center, located across the courtyard from the gathering.
Prosecutors have charged 23-year-old Tyler Robinson with firing the fatal shot and subsequently attempting to conceal evidence allegedly tied to the attack. Robinson has pleaded not guilty, and prosecutors are pursuing the death penalty. That criminal case remains separate from any civil action Kirk’s family may bring.
At the heart of the family’s claim is the allegation that UVU failed to address an obvious and potentially catastrophic vulnerability: the rooftops overlooking Kirk’s outdoor speaking location.
The filing points to the 2024 rooftop assassination attempt against President Donald J. Trump as a clear warning that elevated positions should have been a central focus for those responsible for protecting a prominent political figure.
According to the notice, Turning Point USA personnel specifically raised concerns with UVU Police Chief Jeffrey Long about accessible rooftops near the event. One message reportedly asked either for those areas to be secured or for Kirk’s private security team to be allowed to position personnel there.
“I got you covered,” Long allegedly responded, according to the notice cited by Fox News and other media organizations.
Kirk’s family argues that the message gave his security team reasonable grounds to believe campus police would control the elevated positions surrounding the venue.
The claim further alleges that students were already known to gain access to campus rooftops, where bottles, trash, and other discarded objects had reportedly been discovered. Despite that history, attorneys say UVU had no written security plan and failed to conduct a meaningful security briefing before Kirk arrived.
Only six campus police officers—roughly one-quarter of UVU’s police force—were reportedly assigned to an event expected to attract thousands of people.
Chief Long allegedly requested additional officers from then-UVU President Astrid Tuminez, but the request was denied, according to the filing. Campus police also allegedly failed to seek reinforcements from nearby law enforcement agencies in Orem or Provo.
The family’s attorneys additionally question why university officials approved an outdoor venue surrounded by buildings and elevated firing positions. They contend that UVU could have moved the appearance indoors or selected a more secure location, as the university had reportedly done for other speakers likely to generate controversy.
According to the claim, university officials—not Turning Point USA—controlled the campus access measures, barriers, security perimeters, and metal detectors available for the gathering. Attorneys also fault the school for allegedly failing to deploy drones or actively monitor available surveillance-camera feeds during the event.
Video later introduced in Robinson’s criminal proceedings allegedly captured a person running across the Losee Center rooftop before the shooting.
The family also raises serious questions about the emergency response. The filing alleges that first responders were not immediately available when Kirk was shot amid the crowded outdoor gathering. He was ultimately taken to Timpanogos Regional Hospital in a private vehicle rather than an ambulance.
Attorney Brett Parkinson described Kirk’s killing as “entirely preventable” while announcing the family’s legal action. He said the alleged failures permanently deprived the Kirk family of “their husband, father, son, and brother.”
UVU confirmed that it received the notice and said legal matters are handled through established procedures while the university continues supporting its campus community.
The school previously commissioned an independent examination of its security preparations, emergency communications, and response to the assassination. Initially expected earlier in 2026, the report has yet to be released publicly and is now anticipated this fall.
UVU President Jon Anderson recently said the review would be comprehensive and that additional time was necessary to complete it.
Kirk had openly discussed receiving death threats in the months preceding his assassination, even as he continued defending open participation in contentious political debate.
The notice contains allegations that have not yet been proven in court. If the family files a lawsuit, it will bear the burden of establishing liability under Utah law. Prosecutors, meanwhile, must independently prove Robinson’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in the criminal case.
Still, the filing places a difficult question squarely before university and state officials: After a direct warning about vulnerable rooftops—and an alleged assurance from the campus police chief—why was the position from which Kirk was shot apparently left unsecured?