Speaking of consequences, the House is poised to decide whether Representative Ilhan Omar should lose her committee assignments—an extraordinary step that would mark a formal rebuke of her conduct following the assassination of Charlie Kirk. The resolution under consideration ties her recent remarks and reposted videos directly to the aftermath of a political killing, arguing that her words crossed a line from hard-edged criticism into rhetoric that smeared the victim and implicitly shifted blame onto him.
🚨 BREAKING: A resolution was just filed to kick Somali Rep. Ilhan Omar off of her committee assignments after she mocked Charlie Kirk’s assassination. Every Republican better vote for this. We’re watching. pic.twitter.com/78Bk8NFC1y
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 15, 2025
What’s at issue is not simply whether members may speak freely—of course they can—but whether speech by elected officials, in the shadow of a murder, meets the standards the House sets for itself. Censure is one of the chamber’s oldest tools for drawing that line. Stripping committee assignments is the practical extension of that rebuke: it reduces a member’s influence over policy and oversight without expelling them from office. It requires only a simple majority and, if passed, would remove Omar from the Education and Workforce and Budget Committees.
The political context isn’t subtle. In the days after Kirk’s assassination, there was a surge of posts from public-facing professionals and commentators who mocked or justified his death; some of those voices have faced suspensions or firings. In Congress, the accountability mechanism looks different, but the principle is similar: words matter, and timing matters even more.
The resolution quotes Omar’s interview and a video she reposted—language that described Kirk in incendiary terms and framed his death as the creation of his own “monster.” Supporters of the measure say that’s unacceptable from a sitting lawmaker; opponents will call it a partisan gag order.
Free speech isn’t free from consequences. Tomorrow, we are filing a PRIVILEGED motion to censure Ilhan Omar and remove her from her committees. This will force a vote.
Half measures are not enough any more.
Ilhan Omar is not compatible with our American values. She has no… pic.twitter.com/SwTe0sML5b
— Rep. Nancy Mace (@RepNancyMace) September 16, 2025
There’s also the optics. Omar’s critics have long argued that she shows contempt for the country that took her in, and they see this episode as part of a pattern. Her defenders will say she’s being singled out for speech that should be protected, however harsh. Both sides will get their vote tally. The math, as always, will come down to attendance and whether a handful of members are willing to cross the aisle—or at least refuse to shield rhetoric they would never tolerate if the parties were reversed.
She shouldn’t be in congress. https://t.co/C75NozeDJD
— ApocryphaPathos (@vestamons) September 15, 2025
If the House moves forward, expect two immediate outcomes. First, a clear signal that the chamber intends to police its own standards in the wake of political violence. Second, a recalibration of Omar’s clout: without committees, a member can still legislate and speak, but practical leverage shrinks. Committee slots can be restored by a future majority—that’s part of the calculation here—but the censure, if it happens, will remain on the record.
