The criminal case against the man accused of killing Charlie Kirk will likely play out in a Utah county courthouse, under the control of local prosecutors. But a national audience may very well be watching.

That’s because the alleged shooter, whom authorities identified on Friday as Tyler Robinson, is facing state-level criminal charges. And in Utah — unlike in federal court — criminal trials are routinely televised.

Robinson has been charged with three crimes under Utah law: murder, causing bodily injury with a firearm and obstruction of justice.

It might seem surprising that the case is not a federal one, given the national notoriety of the crime and the FBI’s heavy involvement in the investigation. But homicides can be charged as federal crimes in only a few circumstances — such as an assassination of a federal government official, a killing on federal property or a “hate crime” that was motivated by the victim’s race, religion or another protected characteristic.

So far, the known details of the Kirk shooting do not appear to support a federal prosecution, legal experts say.

“Right now, based on the facts I’m aware of, I don’t see an obvious federal crime,” said Mary McCord, a longtime federal prosecutor and former acting head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. “Of course, there’s hate crimes that sometimes can be applicable, but not for politics.”

McCord cautioned that the investigation is still in the early phases, so it’s possible that evidence may emerge of other participants or additional offenses that could form the basis of federal charges — for instance, violations of federal gun laws or computer-intrusion laws.

But for now, the case is under the jurisdiction of Utah prosecutors. FBI Director Kash Patel alluded to that fact at a press conference Friday announcing Robinson’s arrest, saying his agency is largely supporting state and local officials.

“The FBI has a certain role to play, and we will play that role,” Patel said. “We will continue to work with state and local authorities to develop the investigation, to provide them the evidence they need for their ongoing prosecutions.”

A former federal prosecutor who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive case said it’s typical for the FBI and another federal agency, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, to get involved in local criminal cases that include guns. They often rely on ATF K9 units to help locate firearms and casings, the prosecutor said, even if the cases ultimately result in no federal charges.

Both Utah and the federal system have the death penalty, so there is no more severe punishment that could be achieved by going through the federal system.

No federal crime for domestic terrorism

McCord said Kirk’s assassination is a reminder that there is no federal domestic terrorism charge, despite years of debate about whether one should be passed.

A series of bills were proposed in 2019 to make domestic terrorism a crime at the federal level, but they were waylaid by concerns about the government potentially targeting domestic political groups.

McCord, who now runs Georgetown Law’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, was once a prominent advocate for a federal law making domestic terrorism a crime. She said she thought such a law would help focus resources to make arrests before any act of terrorism takes place.

But President Donald Trump’s public statements and his administration’s actions have given McCord second thoughts about the wisdom of a new law.

“Honestly, I’d be more nervous about it, because this administration, even way more so than the first Trump administration, really does seem pretty hell bent on weaponization,” she said.

She pointed to Trump’s comments, in the wake of the Kirk shooting, blaming the “radical left” for political violence in America.

“I would be very nervous right now about how a federal offense like that might get investigated and used,” she said.

Cameras in Utah courts

For the public, the most obvious difference between a federal case and a state-level one is that cameras are barred in federal courts, whereas state cases are often broadcast.

The lack of video in federal cases means that even historic federal cases receive less attention than they otherwise might. Consider the trial that began this week in the case of Ryan Routh, who is charged with attempting to assassinate Trump on his West Palm Beach, Florida golf course last September.

Routh’s trial is playing out in federal court in nearby Fort Pierce, in relative obscurity — with dispatches from print journalists but no video to capture the nation’s attention.

By contrast, the court proceedings in Robinson’s case — starting with his arraignment early next week — are almost certain to be televised, according to prominent Utah media lawyer Jeff Hunt.

“Utah has one of the best cameras-in-the-courtroom rules in the country,” Hunt said. “There’s a presumption of electronic media coverage in our trial courts. … The rule applies to all criminal proceedings, from initial appearance to sentencing.”