The white house announced on Thursday that the previously planned livestream of former Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan’s execution by firing squad will not take place. President Donald Trump stated that, although the execution will proceed as scheduled on Dec. 3, the visual broadcast will be cancelled following a wave of condemnation from domestic officials, international bodies and human-rights advocates.
Initially, the Pentagon’s Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had pledged to make the execution public, arguing that a transparent display of consequences would deter future acts of terrorism. However, behind closed doors, senior advisers and several members of Congress voiced alarm that a televised killing could become a propaganda tool for extremist groups and tarnish the United States’ moral standing.
Political scramble and the reversal of the livestream plan
Sources close to the administration reveal that President Trump and his inner circle spent Friday debating whether to allow the broadcast. While the president initially affirmed his support for the idea, he later remarked that “many very good and well-meaning people would rather not watch him die.” The shift came after the United Nations labeled the proposal “abhorrent” and after the White House received pressure from Vice President JD Vance and Speaker Mike Johnson both of whom said they would not watch the execution and warned about the potential recruitment value for terrorist media.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump wrote, “He will die, as scheduled, by firing squad, but this event will not be streamed.” He added that families of the 13 Fort Hood victims could attend the execution in person if they so wish, framing it as a chance to “witness justice.” The decision aligns the White House with the Pentagon’s spokesperson, who confirmed that Secretary Hegseth had already consulted the president and now backs the cancellation.
Legal framework and procedural background
Under U.S. military law, a death sentence for a service member requires presidential approval and subsequent appellate review. Hasan, who was paralyzed from the waist down after a shoot-out with police during his 2009 rampage, was sentenced to death in 2013. His execution will be the first military execution by firing squad since 1961 and the first U.S. execution of any kind to be carried out publicly in more than six decades.
The Army has been preparing for the event since at least February, developing protocols for a firing squad, the chair that will hold Hasan, and the number of shooters involved. Previously, lethal injection was the sole authorized method, but a 2023 rule change gave the Army secretary broad discretion over execution methods, opening the door for a firing squad as an alternative. The Pentagon maintains that the execution will proceed as scheduled, but the visual component has been dropped.
Reactions from the international community and civil-rights groups
Human-rights organizations, including Amnesty International, condemned the original livestream plan, noting that only two countries—Iran and Afghanistan—had publicly carried out executions in 2025. The United Nations called the proposal “abhorrent,” warning that broadcasting a state-sanctioned killing could erode global norms against public executions.
Legal analyst John Galligan, who represents Hasan on civil matters, described the reversal as “expected” after the initial decision violated Army regulations. He pointed out that the president may not have been fully aware that Hasan is wheelchair-bound, a detail that could have amplified the graphic nature of a livestream. Galligan warned that the episode will leave a lasting blemish on the U.S. military-justice system.
Despite the controversy, a majority of Republican lawmakers continue to support the death sentence itself, viewing it as a fitting response to the deadliest non-combat attack on a U.S. military base. The debate now centers on the optics of broadcasting the death rather than on the merits of the capital punishment itself.
