How the Incident Began

In June 2025, North Carolina state Representative Julie von Haefen, a Democrat representing Wake County in the North Carolina House of Representatives, became the center of a political controversy after posting a video on her social media accounts that included an image taken at a protest in Raleigh. The image showed a protester holding a sign with graphic symbolism: a depiction of a guillotine and what appeared to be a fake severed head resembling former President Donald Trump — an image that critics interpreted as violent and inappropriate. This protest was part of the larger “No Kings” demonstrations taking place across the United States, organized by groups opposing what they saw as authoritarian tendencies in government policies and rhetoric. In North Carolina, several cities including Raleigh, Charlotte, and Asheville held rallies under that banner, with participants expressing a wide range of political messages. Rep. von Haefen’s social media post included footage of these events, which she had captured during her attendance at the protest. The inclusion of the guillotine image in her post quickly caught public attention and ignited a storm of criticism and political debate.

 Immediate Backlash and Political Reaction

Almost immediately after von Haefen’s video was shared online, criticism came from political opponents, particularly members of the North Carolina Republican Party. The chair of the NC GOP publicly called for von Haefen’s resignation, arguing that the post conveyed poor judgment and that such imagery — particularly a guillotine with a symbol resembling a beheaded political figure — was inappropriate and fostered political violence. Critics said the context of the timing was especially problematic, as the protest imagery circulated at a moment when political tensions and safety concerns were heightened following unrelated acts of violence against public officials in other states. The party leadership and conservative pundits characterized the post as crossing a line and demanded that von Haefen be held accountable for the decision to include the graphic image in her social media content. Von Haefen’s account on the platform formerly known as X was made private shortly after the controversy escalated, and she later deleted the post amid mounting pressure.

Von Haefen’s Explanation and Response

In the wake of the backlash, Rep. von Haefen issued a public statement acknowledging that the image was inappropriate for her social media post. She explained that the controversial image was one frame among many in the video she shared from the protest and that she removed it once she realized its inclusion was problematic. In a message posted to her official Facebook page, she stated that she condemns political violence in all forms and emphasized that her intention in posting the content was to highlight turnout at the protest, not to endorse violent symbolism. Von Haefen reiterated that the video was meant to show civic engagement at the “No Kings” rally, and she expressed regret for the oversight in including the image depicting the guillotine. Though some critics said her response came only after the controversy erupted, von Haefen maintained that she had taken steps to correct the mistake as soon as she understood its potential impact.

Apology on the House Floor

After her initial statement online, Rep. von Haefen appeared before her colleagues on the floor of the North Carolina House of Representatives to offer a formal apology. Speaking directly to fellow lawmakers, she acknowledged that sharing the image was a misstep and reiterated her condemnation of political violence. She offered her apology to the House, to her constituents, and to any North Carolinian who was offended by the social media post. This floor apology underscored her effort to address the controversy transparently within her legislative role and to reaffirm her commitment to civil discourse and responsible communication. During and after her remarks, the speaker of the House and other lawmakers responded by urging caution and respect in the tone and content of political communication, especially given the sharp divisions and concerns over safety in the political environment at the time. The discussion on the House floor also touched on broader issues of social media conduct by elected officials, and the importance of avoiding language or imagery that could be interpreted as promoting or glorifying violence.

Political Context and Broader Debate

Beyond the immediate controversy, the incident involving Rep. von Haefen’s social media post sparked a wider conversation about how lawmakers utilize social platforms and the responsibilities that come with public office. Elected officials often share content to connect with constituents and highlight civic engagement, but the inclusion of politically charged or graphic imagery can blur lines between documentation and endorsement. Some commentators, including von Haefen’s supporters, argued that she was simply sharing footage from a protest — a form of civic participation — and that she did not personally create or promote the violent imagery contained within it. Others noted that the image came from a protest context with multiple messages, and that criticism of von Haefen should not obscure the broader aims of the “No Kings” rallies, which focused on democratic principles and criticism of perceived executive overreach. However, opponents seized upon the specific guillotine image as grounds for questioning her judgment and decorum as a public representative. The debate illustrated the ways in which visual content from protests, especially those with provocative symbolism, can become flashpoints in partisan discourse and can influence public perception of elected officials.

In the aftermath of the controversy, questions also emerged about the handling of official records and social media retention laws applicable to public officials. Von Haefen’s deletion of her X account raised scrutiny from some observers regarding compliance with state record‑keeping requirements for official communications. These concerns reflect a broader trend in how governments and legislators grapple with archiving social media content in a way that preserves transparency and accountability while balancing evolving digital norms. Despite the calls from some critics for her resignation, there has been no official action taken to remove Rep. von Haefen from office, and she continues to serve as a member of the North Carolina House of Representatives. The incident remains a notable example of the challenges faced by lawmakers navigating the intersection of protest coverage, social media communication, public perception, and political accountability in a deeply polarized climate.