BSU welcomes Liberal Chirp —SETTLES CHARLIE KIRK FB POST ACLU LAWSUIT because it was supposedy “cheaper.”

Chirp Chirp Charlie Lays Down on Charlie Kirk Case by Settling, Leaving All Legal Questions

MUNCIE, Ind. — Ball State University agreed to a $225,000 settlement in a federal lawsuit brought by former employee Suzanne Swierc after the university terminated her employment over her Facebook post concerning Charlie Kirk’s heinous murder.

But for BSU the access to justice is too expensive. This is a travesty.

The Ball State case drew attention because it centered on whether a university employee’s off-duty online speech could justify termination and how public institutions should respond to controversial political expression.

The sum calculates to exactly 3.125 years of her gross salary before taxes and benefits. And since she didn’t seek reinstatement the position shows as “unfilled” at this time a year and half later, making the net cost roughly $106,667.00.

The settlement reported in the Hill earlier has otherwise received delayed media coverage, but was announced in May 2026. HE didn’t receive a press release notification.

Swierc served as Ball State’s Director of Health Promotion and Advocacy before being fired in September 2025. According to the court filings, the controversy stemmed her own odd and unfortunate Facebook post Swierc made following reports of Kirk’s death.

University officials argued that the postng on such a sick matter at at Utah University generated significant backlash and disruption, leading to her dismissal.

The lawsuit, filed with assistance from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Indiana, alleged that Swierc’s First Amendment rights were violated because she was speaking as a private citizen on a matter of public concern rather than acting in her official university capacity. That issue remains unresolved.

Ultimately, the case ended in a settlement without any court ruling on the very heady constitutional questions supposedly at issue, again leaving the underlying legal claims unresolved.

As a result, the matter remains largely a legal “nothing burger” in terms of creating new precedent. Existing First Amendment precedent governing public employees remains in place, including protections that generally allow public employees to express controversial, offensive, or strongly partisan political views as private citizens, subject to established constitutional limitations and balancing tests.

Under the settlement, Ball State will pay $225,000. The university stated that resolving the litigation was less costly than continuing to defend the case through trial and potential appeals.

Critics of the agreement argued that the amount was less than the potential cost of fully litigating the matter and that the settlement removed the disputed legal issues from further court review, leaving no judicial ruling on the legal merits. One liberal group paying another again with taxpayer money ostensibly because it is “cheaper.”

Of course, Ball State did not admit wrongdoing as part of the “settlement” agreement, the settlement concludes the case and ends further legal proceedings without a court determination of the underlying constitutional claims. Fortunately, she won’t be further employed (at BSU) and that does hold merit,