(TNND) — From a teacher in South Carolina who reportedly posted "America became greater" because Charlie Kirk was assassinated to an Office Depot worker in Michigan who is "no longer with the organization" after refusing to print what she called "propaganda" for a Kirk vigil, employees are risking their jobs by expressing views about the death of the popular right-wing influencer and activist.

"Another lunatic, left-wing radical who should be fired immediately," Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn said Sunday evening about a social media post, reportedly from a cultural anthropologist at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, in which Kirk was called a "disgusting psychopath."

Wisconsin Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden has been sharing a string of posts from people making insensitive or even celebratory remarks about Kirk’s death.

Conservative social media activist Robby Starbuck, the popular right-wing Libs of TikTok account on X, and others on the right have been doing the same.

American Airlines grounded some pilots “who were caught celebrating the assassination,” Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said.

Ryan Walters, the conservative state superintendent of education in Oklahoma, preemptively warned teachers that they would “never step foot in an Oklahoma school again” if they tried to “glorify this disgusting act of violence” against Kirk.

Americans from all walks of life might feel compelled to share their opinions about Kirk or his assassination, but they could be stepping into a minefield with their social media posts.

The consequences could be severe, even costing someone their job.

“This is a particularly treacherous one,” Todd Belt, the Political Management program director at George Washington University, told The National News Desk on Monday.

“Obviously, Charlie Kirk elicits a lot of strong opinions,” Belt continued. “And for some, he was the voice of what America should be and an answer to the problems that we have, by going out and talking to people with whom he disagreed. On the other hand, the way he did this, and the (demeaning way) and some of the hate-filled speech, is something that a lot of people feel they have to call out. Because they believe that he is being lionized in a way that ignores the content of his speech."

SEE ALSO: Charlie Kirk's legacy: giving young conservatives a voice, role model

Companies might feel pressure to act quickly if one of their employees is caught making remarks viewed as insensitive or damaging.

“We are in an instantaneous society,” Belt said. “And somebody can post something instantaneously, there can be backlash instantaneously, and you can be criticized for not acting” instantaneously.

Peter Loge, the director of the School of Media and Public Affairs at GW, told TNND on Friday, “Social media reacted to Charlie Kirk's assassination the way social media reacts to everything: over the top, loudly and representing a minority of how people think.”

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, speaking to the media Friday after announcing the arrest of the alleged shooter, called social media a “cancer” in society.

“I would encourage people to log off, turn off, touch grass, hug a family member, go out and do good in your community,” Cox said.

But emotions are running high online.

RELATED STORY: Some call for calm as 'noisy and angry' social media reacts to Charlie Kirk's killing

The New York Times analyzed social media activity and found the term "civil war" was mentioned on X around 340,000 times in the first day and a half after Kirk was shot, compared to a daily average of around 18,000 times in recent months.

“The left and their policies are leading America into a civil war. And they want it,” Van Orden said on his X account last week. “Just like the democrat party wanted our 1st civil war. The gloves are off. This I will Defend.”

Conservatives have pointed the finger at educators posting what they view as inappropriately critical views of Kirk in the wake of his death.

A teacher in Iowa, for example, was placed on administrative leave after allegedly posting "1 Nazi down" after Kirk's assassination.

Adam Laats, a professor of education and history at Binghamton University in New York, told TNND on Monday that teachers want to be thought leaders in their communities.

Laats said teachers are also sometimes held to “an impossible standard” and get “unfairly penalized for America's divides.”

An implied part of the job is keeping children safe, Laats said.

“So, I think teachers, K-12 teachers, are vulnerable if they say something on social media that is controversial about anything,” Laats said. “They will be seen not just as someone with whom you disagree, but as someone who's fundamentally not doing the job of keeping children safe.”

Laats said teachers have a responsibility to make all students and families feel included in school.

“And if you're posting inflammatory rhetoric on either side or on any side, on any issue, including this one, it's really not a good look for a teacher,” he said. “But having said that, teachers can't be expected to be the only Americans without strong opinions.”

Some fired employees might have free speech defenses, but the First Amendment won’t offer blanket protection to every worker who posts disparaging remarks online about Kirk.

University of Miami Law Professor Caroline Mala Corbin, who teaches on the First Amendment, said there are different protections for public and private employees.

“The U.S. Constitution does not limit private employers,” Corbin said. “It only limits government employers, because it protects people from the government, including the government as an employer.”

VOTE: Should people lose their jobs for celebrating Charlie Kirk's assassination?

A private employer might not be able to fire a worker based on an inflammatory social media post if the worker is protected under terms of a contract, union membership or state law.

But those aren’t the same as free speech protections.

And public employees, including public school teachers or professors at public universities, might not have a free speech defense if a court finds the speech was related to their official duties or if it was disruptive of the government workplace.

The protected speech also has to be related to matters of social, political or cultural concerns, which would likely include most Kirk posts.

Belt said Republicans are policing social media comments, looking for posts to stoke outrage.

But that’s not a one-sided political practice.

“Democrats have been doing that for a long time, too,” he said.

Some political leaders have called for calm. Others have likened this to war, Belt said.

And that casts Americans as “an enemy from within” and continues the process of demonizing the other side of the political spectrum, Belt said.

“It's the power of words, and the words create a permission structure for these actions,” he said.

Loge told TNND last week that a lot of what has filled social media pages in the wake of Kirk’s death has been “angry and emotional and anti-democratic.”

But it doesn’t have to be.

“Even if a lot of what's on social media is noisy and angry, a handful of people can be calm and encourage calm,” Loge said. “Political scientists have long found that people listen to political elites. They follow their political leaders. And if political leaders say violence is wrong, this is wrong, people will tend to think that violence is wrong.”