Chicago Schools Protect Teacher Who Mocked Kirk, Fire Pro ICE Teacher

Two teachers in the Chicago area got wildly different treatment for political speech: one mocked an assassination and kept her job, while another showed support for law enforcement with a short “GO ICE.” post and lost his. This piece walks through the facts, the double standard, and why that gap matters for parents, students, and communities across suburban Chicagoland.

The violence that changed everything happened on Sept. 10, 2025, when Tyler Robinson allegedly fired from a rooftop and struck Charlie Kirk. Kirk was on a college campus to talk and engage, not provoke a killer, and the attack was reportedly motivated by political hatred. Robinson’s act deserves the harshest penalties if convicted; political violence has no place in a free society.

This lady who mocked Charlie Kirk’s death gets to keep her job teaching in Chicago.

But this teacher is forced to resign for posting “Go ICE.”

The government school system protects the radical left. pic.twitter.com/PQbw2btMH5

— Corey A. DeAngelis, school choice evangelist (@DeAngelisCorey) February 16, 2026

Back in Chicago, teacher Lucy Martinez attended one of the widely mocked “No Kings” protests and did more than hold a sign. She was caught on video pointing a fake gun to her neck and shouting “Bang, bang!” in the wake of Kirk’s death, a clear and chilling piece of performative mockery. That action stirred little visible consequence for Martinez, who remains in the classroom while many parents raise concerns about the message she sent.

One teacher supported Charlie Kirk’s assassination, as leading school-choice advocate Corey DeAngelis for the world to see. The contrast between that episode and the furious reaction to pro-law enforcement speech is what makes this story so stark and political.

ICE is the federal agency charged with enforcing immigration laws, and for many conservatives it represents a front-line law-enforcement agency protecting communities. Across the country, radical activists have targeted ICE agents with doxing and protests, and that hostility has become part of mainstream left-wing spectacle at times. That broader context matters because it shapes how institutions react when employees take public stances on these issues.

In West Chicago, James Heidorn, a physical education teacher, posted a brief and simple expression of support for law enforcement: “GO ICE.” Nothing else, no threats, no calls to violence. The community reaction exploded in ways that did not occur for Martinez; parents demanded action, local politicians held listening sessions, and Heidorn was placed on leave and eventually resigned. That swift punishment for a short pro-ICE post is a glaring example of selective outrage.

Imagine the reverse: what if Heidorn had written “ABOLISH ICE” or “ICE IS HORRIBLE!” The expectation is that the school would likely have shrugged and kept him on, because criticizing law enforcement fits the prevailing local narrative. That assumption, rightly or wrongly, is why so many see the disciplinary choices here as politically driven. A public-school system should be fair to staff voices across the spectrum, not weaponize discipline to enforce one set of opinions.

Meanwhile, Martinez was not placed on administrative leave after celebrating or mocking a murder, and political leaders who leapt to condemn a teacher for a pro-law-enforcement post said little about her conduct. Allowing someone who theatrically mocked an assassination to remain in front of children is an ugly signal about where priorities lie. Teachers should model respect for life and civic argument, not stage tasteless celebrations of violence.

This pattern suggests a deeper cultural problem moving out of central Chicago and into the suburbs: certain kinds of speech get punished, while other, more dangerous speech is tolerated or ignored. Parents deserve teachers who respect the rule of law and who condemn political violence unequivocally. The reality unfolding in these school districts—where support for law enforcement is policed but chants and mockery signaling approval of violence are overlooked—raises serious questions about judgment and safety in our public schools.