She is/was a public employee. Big difference there. If a private sector employee made such remarks and the private sector employer chose to weather the PR storm, that’s their business. Employed by a government? No way, a majority of the people paying her salary belong to the group disparaged.
Of course, given the weaselly wording, she’s probably not actually been fired.
But as a public employee, she is being fired by the government for having said something that the government deems unacceptable.
What would keep the government from similarly firing an employee for saying they support gun rights, or think illegals should be deported, not educated?
I’m not saying there isn’t speech that would cross the line even for a government employee, but when government acts against speech, it is censorship. It would clearly be wrong for the government to deny benefits, or to punish, someone for what she said; the question is whether as an employer, the government still has some restrictions on what they are allowed to do to punish speech they don’t like.
I feel the opposite — if a private employer wanted to fire someone for saying something, I think they should have every right to do so. And sadly, in many cases the government prohibits employers from firing at-will employees, because of laws we have passed to protect certain classes of people.