Utah Supreme Court Case Could Impact Charlie Kirk’s Family Lawsuit
PROVO, Utah — A legal dispute in Utah tied to the murder of Gabby Petito back in 2021 may influence the ability of Charlie Kirk’s family to file a wrongful death lawsuit regarding perceived security shortcomings connected to his assassination at a Turning Point USA event last year, as noted by an attorney involved in the appeal.
“If Kirk’s claims were to be filed now, they would likely face dismissal similar to what happened with Gabby Petito’s claims,” said Brian Stewart, an attorney representing Petito’s family. He is currently engaged in an appeal related to their own wrongful death suit in Utah. “We need the Utah Supreme Court to overturn a previous ruling to open the door for Charlie Kirk’s family to move forward.”
The reference to “Tiede” pertains to a 1996 Utah Supreme Court ruling that upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit following the murders of Kay Tiede and her mother, a case that arose after two men on parole attacked them. This decision reinforced the state’s governmental immunity law concerning wrongful death claims, indicating that claims against governmental entities are often barred when they stem from third-party violence.
The central focus of Petito’s family’s appeal is that Utah’s Constitution does not allow lawmakers to restrict the right to seek damages for wrongful death.
Charlie Kirk’s family recently filed a notice of claim, a preliminary step before formally suing, alleging that Utah Valley University and state officials failed to provide sufficient security during the event, despite acknowledging their responsibility for rooftop security. This alleged negligence is said to have contributed to Kirk’s death on September 10, 2025.
Reports indicate that a sniper, positioned on a rooftop across the courtyard, shot and killed Kirk during his appearance.
Claims in the notice suggest that UVU Police Chief Jeffrey Long assured event organizers with a text stating, “I got you covered” in response to their concerns about access to the roof.
However, Stewart feels that this communication may not be enough to navigate Utah’s extensive governmental immunity laws. He pointed out that parallels can be drawn to the Petito case; the parents might have been able to step in, yet they relied on police assurances. The prevailing sentiment was that authorities had the situation under control, much like Long’s alleged statement suggested.
The Petito family contends that the Tiede ruling should not apply to their situation and argues that if it does, it ought to be overturned. They reference a Utah constitutional provision stating that the right to recover damages for injuries resulting in death should never be revoked.
In addition to the state claim, Kirk’s family’s lawyers are exploring possible avenues for a federal claim. Meanwhile, Tyler Robinson, the individual accused of Kirk’s murder, has pleaded not guilty, with potential legal repercussions including the death penalty if he is convicted.
He is scheduled for a court hearing this Friday afternoon.
