Washington Post forced to rehire Karen Attiah after firing over Charlie Kirk posts

A castoff columnist is heading back to her newspaper gig after an arbitrator ruled The Washington Post lacked “good and sufficient cause” to fire her over Charlie Kirk posts.

In the days following the assassination of the Turning Point USA founder at Utah Valley University on September 10, 2025, leftists of all walks succumbed to their base instincts and the culture of death with mockery, celebration, and slander.

Coupled with “documented performance concerns,” Karen Attiah’s social media posts led to her termination which was overturned Thursday with backpay as the newspaper was said to have “failed to establish the grievant engaged in gross misconduct.”

After obtaining the decision from arbitrator Sarah Miller Espinosa, The New York Times detailed the order to rehire the columnist who had alleged the father and husband once said that “black women do not have the brain processing power to be taken seriously.”

As was reported in September 2025, Attiah later acknowledged Kirk was speaking of Joy Reid and former first lady Michelle Obama and announced her grievance had been filed against the Post.

“The Washington Post fired me last year for speaking the truth after Charlie Kirk’s killing. I fought back. I’m happy to announce: I won my case against the Washington Post. They have been ordered to reinstate me immediately,” she shared on X after the arbitrator concluded the Post “did not have good and sufficient cause” for the termination and was in violation of its labor agreement.

ADVERTISEMENT

In addition to accusing Kirk of racism, Attiah’s social media activity included her stating she was, “Refusing to tear my clothes and smear ashes on my face in performative mourning for a white man that espoused violence is… not the same as violence,” and, “Part of what keeps America so violent is the insistence that people perform care, empty goodness and absolution for white men who espouse hatred and violence.”

However, those weren’t the only justifications the Post used for her termination, as it noted “documented performance concerns” in concluding “we cannot tolerate the risk your performance poses to The Post.”

As she danced her way around the bases, the Times reported that Attiah said the ruling “sends a message to journalists and media institutions everywhere that freedom of expression is always worth fighting for.”

“This decision confirms what we’ve said from the start: I was doing my job as an opinion writer, and this was wrongful termination,” the columnist went on, declaring herself “relieved to finally have that record set straight.”

While the Post declined to comment to the Times beyond affirming its respect for the arbitration process, her social media celebration garnered more than mere congratulatory sycophants. She was also scorched for claiming her posts were “speaking the truth.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Kevin Haggerty

Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Latest Articles