A New Jersey nurse has filed a lawsuit alleging she was suspended without pay after challenging a doctor who reportedly said conservative commentator Charlie Kirk 'deserved' his death.
The case, brought by Lexi Kuenzle against Englewood Health and physician Matthew Jung, raises questions about ethics, workplace retaliation, and free speech in healthcare.
Lawsuit Against Englewood Health
On 13 September 2025, Lexi Kuenzle, a nurse at Englewood Health in New Jersey, filed a lawsuit alleging she was suspended without pay for publicly objecting to a physician's remark about conservative commentator Charlie Kirk.
Kuenzle, who has been a nurse for ten years and nearly two years at Englewood, claims she was punished after reporting the doctor's statement to hospital management.
According to the complaint, the physician, Dr Matthew Jung, allegedly said: 'I hate Charlie Kirk. He had it coming. He deserved it.' The comment was reportedly made in front of Kuenzle, other staff, and a patient on a stretcher.
The lawsuit names Englewood Health, Dr Jung, and others. The hospital has declined to comment, while Dr. Jung has not responded to media requests.
Details of the Incident
The court papers state the exchange occurred as news of Kirk's death circulated. Kuenzle claims she challenged Jung, questioning whether such remarks were consistent with medical ethics. She later shared her account on Instagram.
The next day, Kuenzle was called into a meeting with hospital leadership and suspended without pay. She alleges her supervisor told her she should not have confronted the doctor. A union representative present at the meeting allegedly suggested she seek employment elsewhere.
Her lawsuit characterises the suspension as retaliation for speaking out. While Jung's motive remains unclear, Kuenzle describes his comment as disturbing and incompatible with professional standards.
Why the Case Matters
The case has sparked debate among healthcare professionals, free speech advocates, and political commentators. Supporters argue Kuenzle acted in line with her duty to uphold patient trust and medical ethics. Some conservative groups also claim her treatment reflects political bias, noting Kuenzle identifies as a Trump supporter.
Critics, however, caution that the facts remain untested in court. Neither Englewood nor Jung has provided their version of events, and the legal process will determine the validity of Kuenzle's claims.
The case underscores broader questions: should healthcare workers be disciplined for challenging offensive speech, and how can hospitals balance staff expression with patient confidence? Ethical guidelines for physicians emphasise respect and compassion, and observers warn that even perceived hostility can undermine team cohesion and patient care.
Looking Ahead
Kuenzle is seeking unspecified damages in her lawsuit. The hospital has not disclosed whether Dr Jung faces disciplinary action or whether an internal investigation is ongoing.
The case is expected to fuel a broader debate about free speech in healthcare, protections for whistleblowers, and how hospitals handle conflicts among staff.
For now, much remains uncertain, including the precise context of the remarks and their intent, leaving the courts to decide the outcome.
