The furor over Utah Valley University's (UVU) choice of commencement speaker for 2026 has ignited a heated debate, with conservative student organizations and political figures slamming the decision. The controversy revolves around the invitation of Sharon McMahon, an author and social media personality, who has faced criticism for her posts about the late Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist and the founder of Turning Point USA. The incident occurred on September 10, 2025, when Kirk was fatally shot while speaking at an outdoor event on the Orem campus.
McMahon's posts, now deleted, included quotes from Kirk and expressed her disagreement with his rhetoric, particularly his treatment of marginalized groups. She emphasized the lasting impact of his words and the actions of his followers, stating, 'To many Americans, especially if you are Black, LGBTQ, or Muslim, Charlie Kirk was not a person who simply engaged in good-faith debates on college campuses.'
This perspective has sparked outrage among some conservative circles. Caleb Chilcutt, the president of UVU's Turning Point USA chapter, accused McMahon of tarnishing Kirk's name and minimizing the tragedy. He argued that while universities should embrace diverse viewpoints, McMahon's approach was tone-deaf and disrespectful to those affected by the assassination.
Sage Lloyd, the president of UVU's College Republicans, echoed similar sentiments, opposing the university's decision to have McMahon deliver the commencement address. Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah also joined the criticism, questioning the university's choice of speaker.
However, UVU President Astrid Tuminez defended the selection, praising McMahon's credentials as a New York Times-bestselling author, award-winning educator, and 'America's Government Teacher.' She highlighted McMahon's ability to inspire and instigate courageous action, a perspective that has not gone unnoticed by the university's community.
The controversy raises important questions about the role of commencement speakers and the potential impact of their words on a university community. It also underscores the ongoing tensions between conservative and liberal viewpoints, particularly in the context of political assassinations and their aftermath. As the debate continues, UVU finds itself at the center of a complex discussion, balancing free speech, respect for the deceased, and the responsibility of educational institutions to foster open dialogue.
