A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit against the Texas Education Agency and Commissioner Mike Morath for a letter that encouraged school districts to report teachers who posted “vile content” to social media about the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk.
U.S. District Judge Alan Albright found that the plaintiff’s alleged injuries were not traceable to the Morath letter, since the letter only sought to enforce existing policies.
Background
Following the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk in September 2025, many Texas educators posted about the topic on social media—some even celebrating his murder.
This led Morath to send a letter to school superintendents, warning that he would be referring “all documentation of educators” who proliferated “vile content” about Kirk’s killing to TEA’s Educator Investigations Division. It also encouraged school districts to report all known instances of such behavior.
In response, Texas’ largest teachers union sued Morath and the TEA in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, seeking a permanent injunction that would block the Morath letter from being enforced “in any manner.” This included suspending all investigations that had resulted from the letter’s publication.
Morath filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the Texas American Federation of Teachers (Texas AFT) lacked standing to sue. Specifically, that the union had not pleaded a concrete injury, or that such an injury was traceable to the Morath letter.
Texas AFT argued that its members have suffered harm due to a “chilling of speech” and experiencing adverse employment actions—which it claims are traceable to Morath’s letter and the resulting enforcement actions.
Flags were reportedly placed on teachers’ certificates and some teachers were placed on a “do not hire” list.
The Ruling
Last week, Judge Alan D. Albright agreed with Morath that Texas AFT’s alleged injuries are not traceable to his letter, dismissing the case.
Primarily, Albright reasoned that Texas AFT had challenged the new “TEA Policy,” though no such policy existed. Rather, Morath’s letter merely identified current, in-place policies.
“The Morath Letter simply states that Commissioner Morath would be referring any content that he believed to violate the current Educators’ Code of Ethics to the current Educator Investigations Division,” wrote Albright.
Addressing Texas AFT’s claims that none of its members would have been disciplined if not for the letter’s “requirement” that school districts report teachers, Albright concluded that “if the principals were required to report teachers, it was due to in-place policies and regulations as the Morath Letter did not create any new obligations on behalf of the school districts.”
Judge Albright also agreed with Morath’s argument that any teacher referrals to the ethics committee or encouraging superintendents to refer teachers who violated the existing code of ethics “can only lead to harm based on the government’s speculative future decisions”—which is insufficient to establish traceability.
“This case is dismissed without prejudice,” wrote Albright. The ruling did not comment on the merits of Texas AFT’s constitutional claims.
Related Cases
In a similar case, a Texas Tech University law student brought a federal lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas after being investigated for “making a celebratory statement” in a family law clinic program after Kirk’s assassination.
Student Ellen Mae Fisher was ultimately reprimanded and reported to the state bar for acting unprofessionally, in violation of the school’s honor code. In her suit, Fisher alleged free speech violations and racial discrimination.
On August 14, Judge Brantley Starr dismissed Fisher’s free speech claims for failing to allege a clearly established constitutional violation. However, her racial discrimination claims are still active—meaning the case is proceeding on those grounds.
In another recent case, an arbitrator ordered the Washington Post to rehire Karen Attiah—an opinion columnist who was fired for a social media post she made on the day of Kirk’s assassination, calling him “a white man that espoused violence.”
The August 20 order demanded that the post reinstate Attiah, providing her “full backpay and lost benefits.”
“The Washington Post failed to establish the Grievant engaged in gross misconduct,” concluded arbitrator Sarah Espinosa. “As such, The Washington Post did not have good and sufficient cause to terminate the employment of [Attiah].”
If you or anyone you know has information regarding court cases, please contact our tip line: scorecardtips@protonmail.com.
