Turning Point USA says security lacked rooftop monitoring authority in Charlie Kirk shooting
TPUSA officials say their security team was limited to Kirk’s immediate proximity and did not have jurisdiction to monitor rooftops or surrounding areas during the Utah Valley University event, prompting scrutiny of campus security pract…
Two weeks after the Sept. 10, 2025 shooting that killed Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University, the organization publicly acknowledged a gap in security coverage: its protection detail did not have authority to monitor rooftops or the surrounding area during campus events.
Authorities have charged or accused a suspect in the killing, Tyler Robinson, 22, who is accused of firing from the roof of the Losee Center as Kirk spoke during the university’s campus appearance. The disclosure about security jurisdiction emerged as the investigation and public discussion intensified over how the attack unfolded and what protections are in place for high-profile speakers on campuses.
Spokesman Andrew Kolvet said Turning Point USA’s security team is trained to protect Charlie Kirk in his immediate physical proximity but does not have jurisdiction to police rooftops or the broader campus surroundings. "In defense of our security team, people need to understand that they do not have jurisdiction on the rooftops or the surrounding area. Their only jurisdiction on a campus is Charlie's physical proximity, and they were coordinating with local PD and campus PD to make sure all of those venues [were secure]," Kolvet said on an episode of The Charlie Kirk Show.
Blake Neff, a producer for the program, added that TPUSA did not deploy counter snipers or Secret Service to monitor the area outside of Kirk’s immediate vicinity. The remarks underscored a broader point raised by security analysts and campus police officials about the limits of private security detail protection at large, public events on university grounds. A photo from the scene shows officers and investigators in the university courtyard in the hours after the shooting.
Many campus police departments rely on publicly funded resources and, according to Kolvet, often lack drone programs that could assist in real-time security planning. "Many campus PDs do not have drone programs, which is a big problem," he said. "I'm actually working on that because it's something they should all have. It should be mandated by some sort of law. … So anyway, just in quick defense of the security, they're only allowed to protect his immediate vicinity. They have to rely on PD to secure the larger perimeter." The growing role of drones in policing—used for crowd movements, traffic flow, and threat assessment—has prompted ongoing discussions about regulatory requirements and how agencies balance safety with privacy and airspace rules.
The shooting occurred as Kirk was in the middle of what his organizers framed as an "American Comeback Tour." Investigators have described a rapid manhunt for the suspected shooter, with law enforcement combining campus, local, and federal resources to locate and apprehend the suspect. The incident prompted renewed attention to how universities coordinate with private security teams and local police to secure campuses during high-profile events.
In discussing the risk profile of Kirk’s appearances, Dr. James Orr—who spoke with Kirk on the show—said Kirk had signaled concerns about safety ahead of other engagements. Orr said Kirk acknowledged the risk of an upcoming trip to the University of Missouri on Sept. 29, telling him, "You know, that's going to be the tough one. That's where it's riskiest. That's the one that's going to be the most dangerous." Orr recalled that Kirk asked for robust security plans and said, "Yeah, it's all sorted. Don't worry about it." The remarks, relayed on air, illustrate the types of security considerations that have become part of the conversation around high-profile campus events.
The broader context of the shooting has intensified scrutiny of campus security protocols, particularly the role of private security teams in coordinating with campus police and local law enforcement. While Rubin and other observers have noted the limitations of private detail, officials have said that timely communication and integration with official law enforcement are essential for securing large venues where crowds can be unpredictable. The incident has prompted calls for clearer lines of authority and stronger layers of protection for speakers associated with politically prominent organizations.
As the investigation continues, university officials and security practitioners are reassessing best practices for event security, including situational awareness, access control, and the potential use of drones under appropriate regulatory frameworks. The discussion also touches on resources available to campuses—especially smaller or resource-constrained institutions—that may influence how they plan for and respond to safety threats during high-stakes appearances.
Images from the scene captured the tense, methodical response by investigators and security personnel. The investigation into the rooftop shooting remains active, and authorities have emphasized the need for comprehensive security strategies that consider both immediate protection and perimeter security for public speakers at university venues. 
The episode has underscored the continuing tension between private security arrangements for controversial speakers and the public institutions that host them. As universities navigate political discourse and campus safety, the discussion about roving security, access control, and the role of drones will likely influence policy considerations and resource allocations for campus security programs in the months ahead.