Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Government contractor alleges he was fired for Facebook post about Charlie Kirk, (Nov 14, 2025)

By Patricia K. Ruiz, J.D.

He alleges that on September 17, leaders at the highest level of DHS discussed over email firing him, telling his employer that they had been “notified of inappropriate behavior” by the engineer.

A former employee of a government contractor alleges in a new lawsuit that he was terminated from his employment by order of the federal government in retaliation for his private speech on a matter of significant national interest and attention. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges that his termination was in clear violation of the First Amendment.

Engineer’s termination. The plaintiff, an engineer and project manager working for government contractor Advanced Concepts Enterprises, Inc. (ACES) at U.S. Coast Guard headquarters, managed engineering projects to modernize the communications technology of Coast Guard vessels. He alleges that he received nothing but positive feedback during his time at ACES and the Coast Guard. However, on September 17, 2025, the complaint alleges, leaders at the highest level of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) discussed over email firing him for his protected political speech on social media, telling the employer that they had been “notified of inappropriate behavior” by the engineer.

The complaint alleges that, upon information and belief, the email had been referring to Facebook posts by the engineer relating to Charlie Kirk. Nowhere on the engineer’s Facebook page does he identify himself as a government contractor or employee. A few hours later, the DHS officials ordered his supervisors to terminate his employment, and his employer complied, expressing regret at his termination but telling him that the federal government would not allow ACEs to employ him on the project for which he was hired.

Retaliation for protected speech. The complaint alleges DHS and the Department of Defense violated the Fist Amendment by deliberately having a private employer punish the employee for the content of his protected, political speech. Because the firing constitutes unconstitutional First Amendment retaliation, the complaint alleges, the plaintiff is entitled to reinstatement of his ability to work for the Coast Guard and its contractors. The lawsuit seeks declaratory relief, a writ of mandamus commanding the defendants to rescind their order that he be terminated from his contractor position at the Coast Guard, and equitable relief including any compensation to make the plaintiff whole following his unlawful termination.

The case is No. 1:25-cv-03924.

Companies: Advanced Concepts Enterprises, Inc.

News: LitigationNewsTrends IndividualRights PublicEmployees Discharge Retaliation