The U.S. Department of Defense has confirmed that former Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan will be put to death by a firing squad on Dec. 3. The execution will take place at Fort Hood, Texas the very base where Hasan carried out the 2009 massacre that left 13 soldiers dead and 32 wounded. This decision creates the first military execution by firing squad since the end of World War II and the first S. military death penalty since 1961.
Legal pathway and presidential approval
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, a death sentence imposed by a court-martial can only be carried out after a series of civilian authorizations. President Donald Trump signed the final order on a Friday, granting the Army permission to proceed. Before reaching the Oval Office, the recommendation passed through Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the newly appointed Army Secretary Adam Telle. The Pentagon spokesperson announced the approval on social media, declaring that “Judgement day for Hasan has finally come.”
Execution method and logistical challenges
The choice of a firing squad forces the service to resurrect procedures that have not been used since 1945. The Army’s most recent detailed manual dates to 1959 and outlines a squad of eight riflemen, with one to three weapons loaded with blanks to preserve anonymity. A senior enlisted soldier would give the order, a chaplain would remain with the condemned until the last moments, and a medical officer would place a target over the heart. Because Hasan is now paralyzed and confined to a wheelchair following the incident in which he was subdued, officials must adapt the old protocol to accommodate his condition.
Documents obtained by investigators refer to a contingency plan called “Operation Resolute Justice” originally drafted for a lethal-injection scenario at the federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana. The plan was scrapped after President Trump’s last-minute shift to a firing squad, leaving the Army to quickly devise new logistics for transporting Hasan from Fort Leavenworth, Kansas to Fort Hood.
Political and ethical controversy
Critics argue that holding the execution at the site of the original attack turns the punishment into a public spectacle. Hasan’s civilian counsel, retired Colonel John Galligan described the scheduling as “pushing to get this done at the earliest time possible” and warned that the move could undermine confidence in the justice system. Galligan also noted that Hasan received notice of the execution late at night, without a defense attorney present, and that a habeas corpus petition could still be filed to delay the death.
Defence Secretary Hegseth has long championed the death penalty for Hasan, citing the victims’ families and the need for swift justice. His stance dates back to a 2015 appearance on Fox News where he linked the Fort Hood shooting to broader security concerns. Since taking office, Hegseth has reaffirmed his commitment, stating he is “100 % committed to ensuring the death penalty is carried out for Nidal Hasan.”
Historical context of military executions
The United States has a sparse record of capital punishment within the armed forces. The last execution carried out by the military was a hanging in 1961 while the most recent firing-squad death occurred in 1945. Public executions, once common, were largely eliminated by the mid-19th century, with the final widely recognized public hanging occurring in Kentucky in 1936. Modern U.S. executions are typically performed by lethal injection, though a few states still retain the firing squad as an option.
President Trump’s broader approach to capital punishment includes an executive order signed in 2025 that reinstated the federal death penalty after a previous moratorium. The order describes capital punishment as an “essential tool for deterring and punishing the most heinous crimes.” The Hasan case thus sits at the intersection of military law, presidential authority, and ongoing debates over the role of the death penalty in contemporary America.
