The plan for Fort Hood
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is moving forward with a plan to execute Nidal Hasan, the former army psychiatrist who killed 13 people at a Texas military base 17 years ago. The scheduled date is December 3. Hegseth, who holds the authority to decide the logistics, says the event will use firearms and occur at the same location as the 2009 attack. More controversially, Hegseth plans to livestream the event. Real talk: this is a major departure from how the U.S. has handled things for decades, and it’s giving vibes that are lowkey alarming to legal experts.
Global context and history
Public executions in the U.S. largely stopped back in the 1930s. The last time the public felt even remotely involved was 2001, when victims’ relatives watched Timothy McVeigh’s execution. Currently, only Iran and Afghanistan systematically conduct public executions, often in stadiums or city squares to intimidate populations or project state power. While groups like the Taliban and Hamas use these spectacles to assert authority, Saudi Arabia has recently moved away from the practice.
Historically, when states with shaky rule of law or "tough on crime" agendas resort to public displays of force, it’s usually to win support or silence dissent. Amnesty International noted that global executions hit a record high in 2025, largely driven by Iran. They argue that these moves are often about asserting control rather than actual justice.
Why it matters
It’s not a done deal yet—Hasan still has access to the federal court system, and appeals could easily pause or delay the timeline for years. However, the proposal to livestream the killing shifts the U.S. toward the operating methods of rogue actors and regimes that the country has historically criticized. It’s a massive L for democratic norms, and the geopolitical implications of the U.S. adopting these kinds of "spectacles" are definitely something to watch.
