The U.S. Department of Defense has confirmed plans to livestream the firing squad execution of Nidal Malik Hasan, the convicted Fort Hood shooter, scheduled for December 3. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated in a video interview that the proceedings will be made publicly available, arguing that transparency is necessary to demonstrate the consequences of such crimes. Hasan, a former Army psychiatrist, was convicted of killing 13 people and injuring 32 others in a 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood, Texas. His execution would mark the first military firing squad execution since World War II and the first public execution in the U.S. in nearly a century.
Hegseth’s rationale and legal context
Hegseth, in an interview with Real America’s Voice, framed the livestream as a tool to underscore the severity of Hasan’s crimes, stating: “We’ll make sure that people are able to watch it, that it’s public, because people need to understand that there are serious consequences for these types of things.” The Pentagon has since reiterated that the execution will proceed as scheduled, though legal experts note that Hasan could delay the process through appeals. Michael Radelet, a professor emeritus at the University of Colorado Boulder, told NPR that outside groups may challenge the livestream plans, adding uncertainty to the timeline.
Bipartisan and international condemnation
The Pentagon’s announcement has drawn sharp criticism from lawmakers, human rights organizations, and religious leaders across the political spectrum. Republican Sen. Thom Tillis (N.C.) called the plan “beyond disgusting” and compared it to practices in authoritarian regimes like Iran and Afghanistan. Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) echoed this sentiment, stating: “I absolutely support the sentence of death, but live-streaming executions is what jihadists do. America is better than that.” The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights condemned the move, asserting that livestreaming an execution “is tantamount to a public execution and would breach the absolute prohibition of torture.”
Religious and ethical opposition
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement calling the decision “a barbaric promotion of a culture of death,” while Vice President JD Vance, a Catholic convert, expressed skepticism about the livestream’s implementation. Vance told reporters: “I don’t know that that’s actually going to happen… If it is livestreamed, I’m not going to be watching it.” President Donald Trump, who approved Hasan’s execution method, has not publicly addressed the livestream plan, with the White House deferring to the Pentagon for details.
Survivor perspectives and public reaction
Alonzo Lunsford, a Fort Hood survivor shot seven times during the 2009 attack, supported Hasan’s execution by firing squad but expressed reservations about the livestream. Lunsford told the BBC: “The method is befitting… but it’s not something you should view for entertainment purposes.” He added that while survivors and victims’ families should be able to witness the execution in person, the livestream risked sending the wrong message to younger audiences.
Historical and global context
The last public execution in the U.S. occurred in 1936, when Rainey Bethea was hanged in Owensboro, Kentucky, before a crowd of 20,000. Since then, public executions have been widely condemned as barbaric, with only a handful of countries—including Afghanistan and Iran—continuing the practice in recent years. Amnesty International has highlighted that public or livestreamed executions are typically associated with authoritarian regimes, further intensifying scrutiny of the Pentagon’s decision.
Hollywood and public figures weigh in
Celebrities, including Henry Winkler and The View co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, have also criticized the livestream, with Griffin calling it “toxic for society” and Joyce Carol Oates labeling it “sadism.” The controversy has amplified debates over the ethical implications of publicizing state-sanctioned violence, even in cases involving convicted mass murderers.