Sen. Ted Cruz said this week that a person cannot be prosecuted for speech, but he is in favor of other consequences for those who celebrate the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

This puts the senator at odds with the Trump administration.

Cruz made the comments at Politico’s AI & Tech Summit on Tuesday, when he affirmed that hate speech is protected under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.

“The First Amendment absolutely protects speech,” Cruz said.

“It absolutely protects hate speech. It protects vile speech. It protects horrible speech. What does that mean? It means you cannot be prosecuted for speech, even if it is evil and bigoted and wrong.”

Instead of facing prosecution, Cruz said anyone who has celebrated Kirk’s murder, or suggested that he deserved to die for his political views, should be met with other forms of consequences.

Such as termination or expulsion.

Several people in various jobs across the country have been fired for comments made in response to Kirk’s death.

“We have seen, as you noted, across the country, people on the left — not everybody — but far too many people celebrating Charlie Kirk’s murder,” Cruz said.

“We’ve seen teachers in high schools and elementary schools posting online celebrating. We’ve seen university professors posting.”

“In my view, they should absolutely face the consequences for celebrating murder,” he added.

Cruz’s comments come after Attorney General Pam Bondi said on Monday that the Justice Department would target people who engaged in hate speech following Kirk’s assassination.

“There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech, and there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society,” Bondi told podcast host Katie Miller.

Katie Miller is the wife of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller.

“We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech,” Bondi continued.

Bondi later attempted to walk back her comments, saying hate speech “that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment.”

“It’s a crime,” she wrote on X.

“For far too long, we’ve watched the radical left normalize threats, call for assassinations, and cheer on political violence. That era is over.”

“Free speech protects ideas, debate, even dissent, but it does NOT and will NEVER protect violence,” she added.

“It is clear this violent rhetoric is designed to silence others from voicing conservative ideals. We will never be silenced. Not for our families, not for our freedoms, and never for Charlie. His legacy will not be erased by fear or intimidation.”

Asked about Bondi’s initial comments, President Donald Trump suggested potentially going after journalists who “treat me unfairly.”

“It’s hate,” he told reporters.

Kirk, who was shot and killed during an event on the campus of Utah Valley University last week, was opposed to prosecuting hate speech.

“Hate speech does not exist legally in America,” he wrote on X last year.

“There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment. Keep America free.”

In his remarks on Tuesday, Cruz pushed for more “naming and shaming,” citing English philosopher John Stuart Mill.

Mill argued that the best response to speech is more speech.

“And naming and shaming is part of a functioning and vibrant democracy,” Cruz said.

The battle over free speech following Kirk’s assassination reveals a fundamental divide in America.

Kirk himself would be appalled at using his death to justify government restrictions on speech.

His entire life was dedicated to defending constitutional freedoms, including the right to offensive speech.

The conservative movement now faces a choice between honoring Kirk’s principles or abandoning them in the name of vengeance.

Cruz represents the principled position that Kirk would have supported.

Consequences should come through social and economic pressure, not government prosecution.

Meanwhile, liberals continue celebrating Kirk’s death while simultaneously demanding protection from criticism.

This hypocrisy exposes their true agenda of silencing conservative voices.

Kirk’s assassination was meant to intimidate the conservative movement into submission.

Using his death to justify speech restrictions would hand his killers exactly what they wanted.

The best way to honor Charlie Kirk’s memory is to defend the constitutional principles he died for.

Not to betray them in a moment of grief and anger.

Kirk’s legacy demands that conservatives remain true to their founding principles, even when facing the darkest attacks.

His sacrifice will be meaningless if it leads to the destruction of the very freedoms he championed.

America must choose between Kirk’s vision of constitutional liberty and the authoritarian impulses that seek to exploit his death.

The choice could not be clearer, and the stakes could not be higher.