The murder case of Luigi Mangione, the man who allegedly gunned down United Healthcare CEO Michael Thompson on a Manhattan street, has returned to the headlines this week as a New York court hears motions from his defense team. The hearings have produced new details about Mangione’s conduct during the ten days he spent in Pennsylvania custody following his arrest. Those details reinforce a larger, deeply unsettling truth: America’s cultural left has developed an alarming soft spot for violent political extremists—so long as the extremism is targeted at industries or institutions they already dislike.
On Monday, Pennsylvania correction officer Thomas Rivers testified about the 16 hours he spent monitoring Mangione after the alleged killer was taken into custody. According to Rivers, Mangione seemed preoccupied not with the gravity of the murder he was accused of, but with how the public perceived him. As Rivers recounted, Mangione asked him about public reaction to the case, and Rivers replied that “mainstream media and traditional TV news focused on the crime, whereas people on social media were talking about wrongdoings, potential wrongdoings in the health care industry.”
That reaction alone is revealing. Instead of shock or remorse at allegedly assassinating a father of two in cold blood, Mangione appeared concerned about branding—about which audiences might cast him as a folk hero rather than a murderer. Rivers further testified that Mangione was disappointed by media comparisons to Ted Kaczynski, after reports emerged that he had reviewed the Unabomber manifesto on Goodreads. It is hard to imagine a more disturbing window into the suspect’s mindset.
And yet, it is not Mangione’s narcissism that is most troubling. It is the bafflingly sympathetic media environment that has sprung up around him.
A Disturbingly Warm Media Reception
The mainstream press has reacted to Mangione’s alleged murder with a softness that would be unthinkable if the political valence of his supposed grievance ran in the opposite direction. When Attorney General Pam Bondi directed federal prosecutors to pursue the death penalty, Politico rushed to warn that the decision was “How Trump loses Gen Z.” Joy Behar of The View mused publicly that there could be “backlash” against Republicans over holding an alleged murderer fully accountable.
This narrative—Mangione as misunderstood activist instead of suspected assassin—has only intensified as his trial approaches. CBS News now reports that Mangione “continues to draw supporters,” while Rolling Stone is giving him glowing, movement-hero coverage with pieces like “Inside the World of Luigi Mangione’s Most Fervent Supporters.” The magazine notes that “some fans swoon online while activist groups make him the face of health care and social-justice reform.”
To put it bluntly: a man accused of stalking and killing a corporate executive is being repackaged as an icon of “resistance.”
What’s worse, Mangione wanted exactly this reaction. According to the manifesto discovered during his arrest, he despised “parasitic” health-care companies. His journals and behavior point to a man who projected his personal grievances—perhaps exacerbated by a back injury—onto an entire industry. But this wasn’t the justified anger of a working-class victim of medical bankruptcy. Mangione, as Rolling Stone itself notes, comes from a family whose wealth reportedly “ranges into nine figures.” Whatever else motivated him, it wasn’t poverty or desperation.
Still, progressive media outlets have latched onto the supposed symbolism of the crime. Rolling Stone writes that the murder “captured the anger many Americans feel when it comes to health insurance,” highlighting that “before Mangione was even identified as the main suspect, Thompson’s murder seemed to give people a release valve to vent their distrust in institutions.”
The translation: some Americans dislike insurance companies, so a CEO’s alleged execution somehow became an acceptable vessel for political venting.
That is moral insanity.
A Troubling Fan Movement
The media’s tone hasn’t remained confined to print. It has spilled out into the streets and onto social media, where Mangione has become a bizarre folk hero.
The New York Post reported that “dozens of swoony loony Luigi Mangione fans stood for hours in frigid temps” outside the courthouse this week—some camping out for days—just to catch a glimpse of him. This is not normal civic engagement. It is celebrity worship redirected toward someone accused of premeditated murder.
Mangione has even managed to crowdfund more than $1.3 million for his legal defense. And according to Rolling Stone, he receives up to 115 notes per day from more than 54 countries. These aren’t idle sympathies; they are organized, coordinated displays of adoration.
It is worth pausing here. A wealthy man from a nine-figure family allegedly sneaks up behind a husband and father, shoots him dead, flees to a McDonalds in Pennsylvania, and somehow—somehow—he becomes an object of “social-justice” affection.
We expect young activists to be idealistic. We do not expect them to embrace violent vigilantism.
The Danger of Politicizing Violence
The romanticization of Mangione represents a broader sickness in our political culture: the belief that violence is acceptable if committed in service of the “right” political narrative. Today, sectors of the left have convinced themselves that hatred toward disfavored industries—healthcare, energy, law enforcement—justifies or at least explains acts of extremism. Tomorrow, the target could be any individual whose job, status, or perceived privilege makes them a politically useful villain.
And once violence is normalized as a tool of justice, the center cannot hold.
It is crucial to remember the basic facts of this case as prosecutors present them: Mangione, age 27, allegedly shot Thompson from behind outside a Manhattan hotel, then ran. Officers arrested him five days later. Now his lawyers are attempting to suppress evidence gathered between arrest and extradition, including the suspected murder weapon, his journals, and statements given before he was Mirandized. State-level terrorism charges have been dropped, but he still faces second-degree murder, multiple weapons charges, possession of a forged ID, and federal charges that could bring the death penalty.
This is real criminal accountability—not a culture-war skirmish, not a meme, not a TikTok cause.
A Moment for Moral Clarity
This story demands something simple and increasingly rare: moral clarity.
It does not matter what you think of the insurance industry. It does not matter which political party you prefer. It does not matter what trendy social-media narratives are circulating this week.
What matters is this:
A man was murdered. His children lost a father. His wife lost a partner. His community lost a neighbor. And the suspect—whose guilt will be established at trial—is being treated like a celebrity by people who should know better.
A civilized society does not glorify alleged killers. A morally grounded citizenry does not excuse political violence. And a responsible media does not create sympathetic fanfare around someone accused of executing another human being.
Whether Mangione is convicted or acquitted will be for the courts to decide. But the cultural reaction around him is already a verdict on something else: our nation’s profound struggle to distinguish between genuine injustice and weaponized grievance.
