The United States plans to livestream the military execution of Nidal Hasan, the former army psychiatrist convicted of killing 13 people and wounding 31 others in the 2009 Fort Hood shooting. The Pentagon confirmed the decision, marking a rare and highly public approach to capital punishment.
Hasan is scheduled to be executed on December 3 at Fort Hood in Texas, the same base where the attack took place. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth stated that the event will be made available for public viewing. “We’ll make sure that people are able to watch it,” he said, adding that the timing and location were chosen deliberately to reflect the original incident.
This will be the first US military firing squad execution since 1945 and the first military execution of any kind since 1961. A military jury sentenced Hasan to death in 2013 after finding him guilty of multiple counts of premeditated murder and attempted murder. He remains partially paralysed and uses a wheelchair after being shot by police during his arrest.
Under military law, the president must approve an execution by firing squad. President Donald Trump granted that approval based on Hegseth’s recommendation. The Pentagon said further details about the livestream would be released later.
The announcement comes amid renewed national discussion on the death penalty. Recent difficulties with lethal injections, including a botched attempt in Tennessee, have led authorities to consider alternative methods. Several US states already allow firing squads, and one such execution took place in South Carolina in 2025.
Legal experts have described the decision to livestream the event as highly unusual. No other country is known to broadcast a legal execution in real time, and US courts have previously blocked efforts to televise such proceedings. Public executions in the United States have been extremely rare for decades.
Groups opposed to capital punishment noted that this would be a significant and controversial step. Military law specialists said the move raises new legal questions that have never been fully tested in modern courts.
The case continues to draw attention both for its historical weight and for the unprecedented decision to make the proceedings publicly accessible online.
