Spencer Cox Reflects on Charlie Kirk Assassination, Mental Illness, and Faith in Politics at Utah State
Enjoying this? Share it with someone who needs to see it.
Up Next
Arrest Made in Charlie Kirk Assassination Case: Tyler Robinson Turned In by Family After Utah Valley University Shooting
21:53
Erika Kirk Leads Turning Point USA Event at Utah State Following Charlie Kirk's Death at Utah Valley University
5:37
Jim Spiewak Interviews Four Witnesses to the Charlie Kirk Assassination at Utah Valley University
20:25
Spencer Cox Reflects on Charlie Kirk Assassination, Mental Illness, and Faith in Politics at Utah State
Spencer Cox opens up about the moment he learned Charlie Kirk had been shot at Utah Valley University, describing it as a political assassination and an attack on free speech. The Utah governor discusses the nihilism crisis affecting young people, defends his stance on women's sports legislation, and explains why peacemaking isn't soft, it's the hardest thing you can do. Speaking at Utah State University alongside former Freedom Caucus chair Andy Biggs, Cox addresses why conservatives turned to prayer instead of riots, and challenges the dangerous belief that speech is violence.
Spencer Cox was at the capitol when his assistant pulled him aside with news no governor wants to hear. A captain from the highway patrol delivered the devastating message: there had been a shooting at Utah Valley University, and Charlie Kirk had been shot. Cox struggled to process the words, asking for confirmation because in moments like these, misinformation spreads quickly.
Someone handed him their phone with the video already loaded. Cox watched footage he wishes he could unsee, acknowledging that many who were there that day share the same burden. Within thirty seconds, the White House situation room called. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a longtime friend of Cox's, wanted to know what was happening. But in those early moments, no one could provide exact details.
The governor immediately shifted into crisis mode, assembling his team to determine which hospital Kirk had been taken to. Cox's thoughts turned to Kirk's wife and two young children—the human cost of what had just occurred. He knew this wasn't just a random act of violence.
Political Assassination and the Attack on Free Speech
Cox didn't hesitate to call the shooting what it was: a political assassination targeting Charlie Kirk specifically because of his beliefs. He expressed frustration that some were afraid to state this plainly, insisting society must not shy away from calling things what they are.
The governor identified four immediate priorities in the aftermath. First, keeping Kirk alive became paramount. Second, law enforcement needed to find and hold the perpetrator accountable—something Cox had complete confidence Utah's law enforcement would accomplish. Third, he recognized this attack transcended one individual; it was an assault on free speech, American ideals, and constituted an act of treason. Cox noted that America hadn't experienced a high-profile assassination like this in 55 years, not within his 50-year lifetime.
The fourth realization carried particular significance: Utah residents wouldn't respond with riots or violence. There would be no burning cars or destruction. Instead, the state turned to prayer—a response Cox viewed as a testament to Utah's character and values.
The Dangerous Mind Virus: When Speech Becomes Violence
Speaking at his alma mater Utah State University—in what he called "the most Turning Point thing ever" with Fox News, the governor, and former Freedom Caucus chair Andy Biggs all sharing one stage—Cox addressed the ideological roots of the violence.
Andy Biggs pointed out the escalating inflammatory rhetoric, particularly the labeling of ordinary people as fascists and Nazis. Cox built on this observation, noting that when regular citizens participating in civic processes get accused of being the same evil America fought to liberate Europe from, dangerous consequences follow.
The governor identified two of the most destructive trends in modern discourse. The first is the notion that speech equals violence—an idea he called both wrong and illogical. But it gets worse, Cox explained, because this twisted logic then frames violence as speech. When everything gets filtered through a lens of oppressor versus oppressed, people can justify actions they would never otherwise take.
Cox was unequivocal when asked if this represented a "both sides" issue: No. This particular mindset—that speech is violence and violence is speech—comes exclusively from one side, not from the right. He acknowledged that violent people exist on the far right, refusing to deny that reality, but the ideological framework justifying violence as a response to disagreement originates from the left.
Nihilism: The Deeper Problem
Cox introduced another factor he believes underlies much of the current crisis: nihilism. He admitted learning about this concept the hard way. Nihilism represents the absence of belief—no God, no roots, no morals, no distinction between good and evil.
This worldview can take root anywhere, even in conservative, idyllic communities like southern Utah's Washington County or Gilbert, Arizona. People might grow up in traditional households yet still adopt nihilistic beliefs, abandoning any foundational principles.
The evidence of this shift appeared even in deeply conservative Utah communities. Drag queen story hours in Provo. The Y at BYU painted in trans colors—an image jarring to longtime Utah residents. These incidents signaled that destructive ideologies were seeping into communities previously considered insulated.
Faith, Politics, and Permission to Engage
Andy Biggs highlighted one of Charlie Kirk's most important contributions: giving people permission to openly discuss faith and religion in political contexts. For years, conventional wisdom dictated separating the two spheres. But Kirk demonstrated that a younger generation could wear their faith proudly while engaging in political discourse.
This approach provides something young people desperately need: roots, cause, and affirmation. Kirk's example has been healthy for America, Biggs argued, encouraging political figures to take that extra step of integrating their beliefs with their public service.
Cox expanded on this theme by referencing teachings from his recently deceased church prophet about peacemaking and bridge building. The core message: anger never persuades and hostility never convinces anyone.
But Cox pushed back hard against any suggestion that this approach represents weakness. Peacemaking isn't soft—it's the hardest thing anyone can do. And Charlie Kirk understood this profoundly.
Charlie Kirk's Approach to Engagement
Kirk went into difficult spaces and engaged with people vastly different from himself, people who disagreed with him fundamentally. Yet he treated everyone with respect, love, and dignity. This wasn't capitulation or weakness; it was strength.
Cox warned that some within the Republican party don't want this kind of engagement. They prefer name-calling or complete disengagement. But falling into that trap would betray Kirk's legacy and weaken the conservative movement.
The governor emphasized the importance of personal agency and individual responsibility. The person who committed the assassination bears sole responsibility for that decision—not the church, not Utah, not anyone else. However, society must take mental illness more seriously and help people get treatment.
Yet even here, Cox returned to Kirk's philosophy: get off the couch, disconnect from social media, get married, have children, do something meaningful with your life. Much of the mental illness epidemic stems from lack of purpose, grit, and responsibility.
Setting the Record Straight on Women's Sports
A student named Andrea asked Cox about his history with Charlie Kirk, specifically regarding their disagreement over women's sports protection in 2022, when Kirk called for Cox's expulsion from the Republican party.
Cox used the opportunity to clarify what actually happened, acknowledging how difficult that decision had been. He wanted to be absolutely clear: he never advocated for allowing boys to play girls' sports.
The situation involved a lawsuit in Idaho, where a judge had placed a hold on that state's ban for two years, allowing boys to continue competing in girls' sports. Utah anticipated facing the same judicial interference. So Cox's administration developed an alternative approach: a commission review process that would prevent biological males from dominating women's sports, taking away scholarships, or otherwise creating unfair competition.
A judge did exactly what Cox feared, blocking Utah's ban. The administration then worked with legislators to fix the law. Cox signed one of the nation's first bathroom bills and addressed another problem: policies requiring youth to transition for a year before competing, which actually incentivized transitioning. Utah stopped this practice and prohibited minors from transitioning altogether.
Cox estimated he and Kirk would agree on 99% of issues. He wished they could have debated this specific matter three years ago, believing Kirk would have understood his reasoning better—though likely still disagreed, which Cox found perfectly acceptable.
Making Space for Disagreement
The governor closed with a challenge to his party. If Republicans want to win elections decisively—instead of maintaining razor-thin majorities that barely prevent government shutdowns—they need to make space for people who don't agree on every single issue.
This doesn't mean abandoning principles. It means engaging across differences, as Charlie Kirk demonstrated throughout his career. The example Kirk set that night at Utah State University, with a diverse panel willing to discuss difficult topics openly, represented exactly the kind of coalition-building necessary for political success and cultural renewal.
Cox's message was clear: honor Charlie Kirk's memory not through retreat or rage, but through courageous engagement rooted in faith, strengthened by principle, and extended with respect even to those who disagree.
Comments
Be the first to comment on this video.