Austin Peay prof fired over Charlie Kirk post sues Marsha Blackburn
A professor alleges Blackburn used her office to pressure his university over his social media post.

SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYCredibility rates Yahoo News, which republished this story. The other scores rate the article itself.
The page carries an attributed Nashville Tennessean report from named journalists, with a response from Blackburn’s spokesperson and claims attributed to the lawsuit. Yahoo News is hosting another outlet’s reporting, so the assessment rests primarily on the identified newsroom and reporting rather than original Yahoo reporting.
- Source type — An established newspaper’s report is republished on a national news platform.
- Author attribution — Two named Tennessean journalists are credited.
- Transparency — The article attributes allegations to the lawsuit and includes a response from Blackburn’s spokesperson.
- Editorial standards — The original newsroom is identified, but the page provides limited information about corrections or standards.
The report gives a clear timeline, attributes the central allegations to the lawsuit, includes Blackburn’s response, and supplies settlement and broader case figures with attribution. It offers limited independent legal analysis or detailed examination of the competing constitutional claims.
HOW WE SCORE ↗The article includes the allegations, Blackburn’s response and contextual information about the university’s actions and other cases. It does not include an independent legal expert or a detailed response to the specific allegations beyond the spokesperson’s statement.
- Counterarguments presented — Blackburn’s spokesperson disputes the suit and defends her criticism as protected speech.
- Source diversity — The report draws on the lawsuit, a spokesperson, a lawyer, university statements and public records.
- Omitted context — No independent legal expert explains the constitutional questions or responds to the allegations.
The article uses largely neutral, attributed language and presents both the lawsuit’s allegations and Blackburn’s response. Its contextual reporting does not clearly favor a political side.
- Language tone — The report mainly uses neutral descriptions and labels claims as allegations.
- Source selection — It includes the plaintiff’s claims and a response from Blackburn’s spokesperson.
- Framing — The story centers on the lawsuit and adds background on related cases without an evident partisan argument.
Republished with credit
Republished from The Tennessean, with credit to the original publisher.
Not rated.
Darren Michael sued Sen. Marsha Blackburn, alleging she used her office to pressure Austin Peay State University to punish him for a social media post about Charlie Kirk. Blackburn’s spokesperson called the suit meritless and said her criticism was protected speech.
Darren Michael filed the lawsuit in federal court on Aug. 7, accusing Blackburn of using public statements, private communications and threats of sanctions to pressure Austin Peay to fire him. The suit asks the court to find that his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated and to block future retaliation. Blackburn’s spokesperson said the senator had not been served and described the lawsuit as meritless.
Austin Peay initially announced Michael’s firing after his post, later said he had been suspended, and ultimately reinstated him. Michael’s lawyer said he received $500,000 in a January settlement with the university. The article also reports that at least seven Tennessee cases connected to Kirk-related firings or legal actions have resulted in more than $3.2 million in settlements and back pay, according to public records.
Community verdict
16 VOTESPeople in this story
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…
