The family of conservative late activist Charlie Kirk has taken the first formal step toward a potential wrongful-death lawsuit against Utah Valley University and the State of Utah, alleging that officials ignored a specific warning about rooftop access before Kirk was assassinated during a campus speaking event last year.
The notice of claim, dated Sept. 9 and sent to the Utah Attorney General’s Office, is not itself a lawsuit. It preserves the family’s ability to pursue claims against the university, the state, the UVU Police Department, Police Chief Jeffrey Long, former university president Astrid Tuminez and potentially other officials, according to reporting by The Daily Wire, ABC News and the Deseret News.
Kirk, 31, was killed on Sept. 10, 2025, while debating students before a crowd of roughly 3,000 people at UVU in Orem. The gunman fired from the roof of the Losee Center for Student Success, about 415 feet from the outdoor event, prosecutors have said.
The claim centers on what the family’s lawyers call “a series of stunning failures and reckless decisions” that created a foreseeable danger and left Kirk exposed to a threat that officials allegedly had been warned about in advance.
“Charlie Kirk was violently and publicly assassinated while speaking at an event at Utah Valley University,” Brett Parkinson, counsel for the Kirk family, said in a statement provided to The Daily Wire. Parkinson called the killing “entirely preventable” and alleged that Utah and UVU failed to carry out stated security promises, including protecting rooftops around the event site.
‘I got you covered’
According to the notice, a student alerted Turning Point USA before the event that students could access rooftops near the Sorensen Student Center. A TPUSA official relayed the warning to Long and asked that the access be controlled—or that Kirk’s private security team be allowed to cover it.
Long allegedly replied: “I got you covered.”
The family’s attorneys say the response led Kirk’s team to believe UVU police had a plan to secure elevated positions around the quad. The shooter later reached a different rooftop and fired the fatal shot.
The notice also alleges that UVU failed to conduct a meaningful risk assessment, assigned only six campus police officers to the event, had no written security plan or pre-event security briefing, did not monitor relevant surveillance footage in real time and did not deploy drones to watch the surrounding roofs.
Those allegations have not been tested in court. In remarks after the shooting, Long said campus police had coordinated with Kirk’s private security team and that some of the six assigned officers were in plain clothes and monitoring the crowd, ABC News reported.
“You try to get your bases covered and, unfortunately, today we didn’t,” Long said at the time.
The notice argues that the threat of a rooftop attack should have been an obvious concern after the 2024 attempted assassination of President Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. It also cites other recent acts of political violence as evidence that Kirk’s appearance presented a heightened security risk.
UVU responds as security review remains pending
UVU has not publicly addressed the individual allegations in detail. “We are aware of the notice of claim,” a university spokesperson told the Deseret News. “UVU addresses legal matters consistent with our established processes. Our focus remains on supporting our campus community.”
The university announced a third-party security review after the killing, saying it would examine campus procedures and offer lessons for improving preparedness. The review, originally expected in late spring, is now anticipated this fall, according to the Deseret News, which reported that its cost has approached $400,000.
In its original announcement, UVU said it would use the review’s findings to improve safety practices at the university and across Utah’s higher-education system. The delay has nevertheless become another point of criticism as Kirk’s family seeks answers about how an armed attacker was able to reach an exposed rooftop during a major outdoor event.
No damages figure was listed in the notice, though it says the potential damages could be substantial. The prospective plaintiffs identified in reporting include Kirk’s estate, his widow Erika Kirk and their two children. Under Utah law, parents may also qualify as heirs in a wrongful-death action, and the Deseret News identified Robert and Kathryn Kirk as possible additional claimants.
Trump honors Kirk one year later
Trump invoked Kirk’s death last week during a speech at the Republican Midterm Convention, using the anniversary to pay tribute to his longtime political ally and to condemn those who celebrated or excused the killing.
“One year ago tomorrow, a far-Left extremist assassinated my great friend and conservative voice Charlie Kirk because Charlie Kirk spoke the truth,” Trump said, according to The Daily Wire’s coverage. The president later told the crowd that Republicans would not allow Kirk’s political opponents to prevail and closed his tribute by expressing his love for Kirk. The White House also published an anniversary video titled “America Misses Charlie Kirk” on Sept. 10.
The legal notice comes as the criminal case moves toward trial. A Utah judge ruled Sept. 1 that Tyler Robinson will stand trial on all seven counts against him, including aggravated murder, according to KSL. Robinson has pleaded not guilty, and prosecutors have said they intend to seek the death penalty if he is convicted.
For Kirk’s family, the potential civil case is a separate effort to determine whether the killing could have been prevented before the gunman ever reached the roof.
“Justice and accountability under the law are key tenets of the American judicial system,” Parkinson said in the family’s statement. “This claim preserves the right of Charlie Kirk’s family to pursue accountability for Charlie’s death.”
