A lawsuit by a Coast Guard contractor who says he was fired over Facebook comments about Charlie Kirk has survived the Trump administration’s motion to dismiss, allowing his First Amendment retaliation claim to proceed. Politico reporter Josh Gerstein reported the development on X.

Peter Souders, a former Coast Guard contract worker, says he was fired “in retaliation for his private speech on a matter of significant national interest and attention,” in violation of his First Amendment rights. He sued the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and officials leading those agencies.

According to the lawsuit, Souders was dismissed for comments he made on Facebook about Kirk’s assassination. The 35-year-old engineer and project manager worked for Advanced Concepts Enterprises Inc. (ACES), a government contractor, and was assigned to the Coast Guard’s headquarters when members of what the lawsuit describes as a Charlie Kirk retribution campaign circulated his posts on X.

In one comment, Souders wrote that Kirk opposed civil rights and abortion and described him as a “noted Islamophobe,” a “Putin operative” and a “Nazi.” He also wrote: “You can’t be pro-punching Nazis and then pretend it’s a bad thing when someone actually does.”

The lawsuit says Souders was terminated in 2025. He allegedly was told by ACES’s chief financial officer that the company had “received an email from the federal government directing that Mr. Souders’s work for the Coast Guard be terminated,” and that ACES would have to fire him completely because he was employed as a Coast Guard contractor.

Souders argued that the defendants retaliated against him for protected speech, among other claims for relief. The federal government moved to dismiss the complaint in its entirety, arguing that the case belonged in another court because Souders was a contract employee.

Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, rejected the argument that Souders’s First Amendment claim belonged in the Court of Federal Claims rather than the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, where he filed it. The court’s official page identifies Judge Timothy J. Kelly.

“The contract at issue is between the Coast Guard and Souders’s employer — ACES — not between the Coast Guard and Souders himself,” Kelly wrote. The court filing is available through the district court.

The ruling resolves where Souders’s claim may be heard, not whether the alleged retaliation occurred. The case can now continue in the district court, where the parties’ positions and the underlying allegations remain to be litigated.

If Souders prevails, he would not be the first person to obtain a result involving First Amendment protections after criticizing Kirk. Earlier this year, Republican-leaning Oglethorpe County, Georgia, agreed to settle with a schoolteacher who was removed after accurately posting that Kirk, an assassinated MAGA influencer, was a gun enthusiast.

Plaintiffs in similar cases alleging First Amendment violations have also reached settlements worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that “a professor at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville was awarded $1.9 million; an employee at Indiana University will receive $225,000; and an Iowa teacher won more than $200,000.”

Source: Alternet