State affairs committee advances bill to make Oct. 14 'Charlie Kirk Day of Remembrance' after heated debate

The Florida House State Affairs Committee voted 18-7 to report CS for HB 125 favorably after a daylong hearing that featured intense debate over whether the measure—designating Oct. 14 as "Charlie Kirk Day of Remembrance"—is an appropriate, nonbinding state recognition.

Representative Ben Arroch, the sponsor, told the panel the bill is symbolic and not mandatory, saying the day would give Floridians a chance "to pause and remember a moment when the First Amendment was answered with violence and to recommit ourselves to resolving disagreement the right way through debate." He repeatedly told members the designation would not require schools or other entities to take action.

Opponents, led in remarks by Representatives Anna Eskamani and Representative Russell Nixon, said the bill elevates a partisan and divisive public figure whose past statements have deeply offended many Floridians. "This bill is a slap in the face of Black people, particularly Black parents," one member said during debate, arguing that even a symbolic day can cause harm and that state-sanctioned remembrances are not neutral.

Supporters—including several lawmakers and representatives of faith-based groups—said political violence is a bipartisan problem and that honoring a person murdered for exercising free speech underscores the importance of civil debate. Anthony Verdugo of the Christian Family Coalition told the committee that Kirk was "murdered in a horrific hate crime because of his Christian faith," and urged a supportive vote.

The committee considered two amendments filed by Representative Gant. The first would have replaced the honoree with Assata Shakur; that amendment was explained and debated but ultimately withdrawn by the sponsor. The second amendment sought to add recognition for survivors of the Jeffrey Epstein case and related student-driven proposals; that amendment was debated and put to a voice vote and was not adopted by the committee.

Public testimony was sharply divided. Matthew Grocholski urged members to reject the bill, saying it was inconsistent with how the Legislature has memorialized other tragedies. Kathleen Murray of Citizens Defending Freedom and other supporters said the measure honors free-speech principles and remembers a victim of political violence.

After the debate the committee reported CS for HB 125 favorably by roll call, 18 ayes to 7 nays. The sponsor and multiple members stressed the designation is symbolic and not intended to mandate school or district activities; other members said that, despite assurances, official recognitions often produce local-level actions and community harm, especially for students who may face uncomfortable classroom conversations.

The committee adjourned after completing its business. Next steps for CS for HB 125 are further consideration as it moves through the legislative process.