Ohio Judge Under Fire for Celebrating Charlie Kirk’s Assassination
CLEVELAND, OH — Public outrage is intensifying after Ohio judge Ted Berry made shocking remarks about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, describing the murder as “karma” and posting the words “Rest in Hatred and Division.”
The comments, which surfaced online shortly after Kirk’s death, have been widely condemned as an egregious breach of judicial ethics. For many critics, the episode highlights what they call “corruption from the bench” — the failure of a judge to uphold impartiality and respect for the law, regardless of personal or political beliefs.
The Assassination of Charlie Kirk
Charlie Kirk, 31, was the founder of Turning Point USA, a prominent conservative youth organization. Known for his outspoken defense of American values, faith, and free speech, Kirk built a national following through his activism, college campus tours, and podcasting.
On Wednesday, Kirk was fatally shot while speaking at a university in Utah. Authorities are treating the incident as a political assassination, and a suspect, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, has been arrested on charges including capital murder and obstruction of justice.
Kirk leaves behind a wife, Erika, and two young children. His death sparked vigils and tributes across the United States, while political leaders — including former President Donald Trump — vowed that his legacy would not be forgotten.
Judge Berry’s Remarks Spark Backlash
Instead of mourning, Judge Ted Berry reportedly mocked Kirk’s death. “Rest in Hatred and Division,” Berry wrote, adding that the killing was “karma.”
Legal scholars and public officials quickly condemned the statement. Professor Daniel Hughes, a constitutional law expert, said:
“When a judge openly celebrates the murder of a citizen, it destroys confidence in the justice system. Whether you agreed with Charlie Kirk’s politics or not is irrelevant — this is about the rule of law. Judges must never display bias, much less revel in political violence.”
Berry’s critics argue that his words undermine the core principle of judicial neutrality. If a judge feels comfortable expressing such disdain in public, they argue, it raises the question of how he rules in cases involving people with opposing political views.
Calls for Accountability
Demands for Berry’s removal are growing. Conservative advocacy groups and some lawmakers have called for an immediate investigation by the Ohio Supreme Court’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel, which oversees judicial conduct.
“This is not about free speech,” said Angela Morrison, director of the Ohio Justice Reform Coalition. “This is about ethics. When judges take an oath, they commit to being impartial arbiters. Celebrating assassination disqualifies you from serving on the bench. Justice demands he has to go.”
While judicial discipline can range from reprimands to suspension or removal, many activists argue that Berry’s remarks leave no room for anything less than resignation.
Trust in the Judicial System at Stake
Public trust in the courts has already been tested in recent years amid debates over politicization of the judiciary. Judge Berry’s words, critics say, feed into the perception that rulings are guided by ideology rather than law.
“If judges can gloat over political killings, what does that say to defendants who appear before them?” asked Mark Stevens, a retired Ohio prosecutor. “How can any citizen trust they’ll receive fair treatment in his courtroom?”
Even some who were not supporters of Kirk have voiced concern. Civil liberties advocates warn that tolerance of such behavior could set a dangerous precedent for judges of any political leaning.
Silence From the Bench
As of Saturday evening, Judge Berry has not issued a public response. The Ohio Judicial Conference and the state’s disciplinary body have also remained silent.
Meanwhile, Kirk’s supporters point to the judge’s remarks as evidence of a deeper cultural rot. They argue that hatred toward conservatives has reached such a fever pitch that even members of the judiciary — tasked with protecting the rule of law — now openly celebrate violence against them.
A Divisive Moment in American Justice
Charlie Kirk’s assassination has already intensified political divisions. The revelation that an Ohio judge celebrated the killing has only deepened those wounds, creating what one commentator called “a crisis of confidence” in the judiciary.
As tributes continue to pour in for Kirk, many Americans are asking the same question: If the very people entrusted to uphold justice rejoice in the death of their political opponents, how can justice itself survive?
For Judge Berry, the pressure is mounting. Calls for resignation grow louder by the hour. And for the judicial system he represents, the scandal serves as a sobering reminder: impartiality is not optional — it is the foundation of justice itself.
