US lawmakers, religious leaders and rights groups criticised a Pentagon proposal to livestream Nidal Hasan’s December 3 execution.
Trump’s stance remains unclear, while JD Vance has expressed uncertainty over the broadcast.
The proposal has sparked concerns over human rights, extremist propaganda and legal limits on broadcasting military executions.
Republican lawmakers have joined religious leaders and human rights groups in opposing a Pentagon plan to livestream the execution of Nidal Hasan, the former US Army psychiatrist convicted of killing 13 people at Fort Hood in Texas in 2009.
The controversy has put President Donald Trump under pressure to reconsider the proposed broadcast, which Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has backed.
The execution by firing squad is scheduled for December 3 at Fort Hood, now known as Fort Cavazos. Hegseth said the livestream would make the consequences of such attacks visible to the public.
The proposal has drawn criticism from both sides of the political aisle, with opponents arguing that broadcasting an execution would turn a state punishment into a public spectacle.
Trump initially told reporters on Friday that he had not made a decision about livestreaming the execution, although he supported the death penalty for Hasan. Vice-President JD Vance also expressed uncertainty about whether the Pentagon would proceed, saying he would not watch the broadcast if it went ahead.
Subsequent reporting by The Washington Post said Trump had approved the proposal, leaving uncertainty over the administration’s final position.
Republicans And Religious Leaders Raise Objections
Several Republican lawmakers have criticised the proposed broadcast despite supporting Hasan’s death sentence. Senator Thom Tillis called the idea “beyond disgusting”, while Senator John Curtis warned that publicly displaying executions could erode civic values. Representative Austin Scott also argued that livestreaming executions was associated with extremist groups rather than American institutions.
Religious leaders have voiced similar concerns. Archbishop Paul Coakley, president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, described the plan as a “barbaric promotion of a culture of death”. Walter Kim, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, warned that the broadcast risked turning a solemn state responsibility into a spectacle.
Human Rights Concerns And Legal Questions
The United Nations human rights office has said that public executions constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Amnesty International has also condemned the use of a firing squad. Critics have warned that a livestream could expose children and other viewers to traumatic material and potentially provide propaganda for extremist groups.
The legal position is complicated. US law prohibits recording or broadcasting executions in the federal prison system, but the same prohibition does not apply in the same way under military regulations. Legal experts have said that challenging the proposed broadcast could be difficult, with Hasan himself potentially having the clearest legal route to contest it.
Hasan, now 56, was convicted in a military trial over the November 2009 shooting at Fort Hood that killed 13 people and wounded more than 30 others. The planned execution has renewed debate over capital punishment and the limits of public access to state executions. The Pentagon has yet to provide full details about the broadcast arrangements or whether victims’ families will be invited to attend.
The dispute comes less than a month before the November 3 US midterm elections, in which Republicans are fighting to retain control of Congress. The controversy has exposed divisions among conservatives over how the government should carry out capital punishment, even when there is broad agreement among critics that Hasan was responsible for a grave crime.
