President Donald Trump approves the execution of former Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, convicted of murdering 13 people and wounding 32 others at Fort Hood in 2009. The military plans to carry out the sentence at the same installation where the attack occurred.
By Lucretia Hughes Klucken
WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed Thursday that convicted Fort Hood mass murderer Nidal Malik Hasan will face execution by an Army firing squad on Dec. 3, nearly 17 years after the former military psychiatrist opened fire on fellow service members at the Texas installation, killing 13 people and wounding 32 others.
The execution is scheduled for 1 p.m. Central Standard Time at Fort Hood, the same military installation where Hasan carried out the Nov. 5, 2009, attack.
Hegseth revealed additional details during an Oct. 8 interview with conservative commentator Jack Posobiec on Real America’s Voice, announcing that the execution would be public.
Pentagon officials subsequently confirmed that the military intends to livestream the execution, an extraordinary departure from modern American execution practices.
The decision follows President Donald Trump’s Oct. 2 approval of Hasan’s death sentence after years of military appellate proceedings.
If carried out, the execution would mark the first by the U.S. military since 1961 and the first military execution by firing squad since World War II.
Hegseth: Military Justice Will Be Carried Out
During his interview with Posobiec aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, Hegseth defended the decision to execute Hasan at Fort Hood rather than at a federal prison.
The defense secretary emphasized the significance of returning Hasan to the location of the attack and having American soldiers carry out the sentence.
Hegseth said the execution would take place on a Thursday at 1 p.m., reflecting the timing of the original shooting.
The secretary also described the attack as an act of Islamist terrorism committed by a uniformed Army officer against his fellow service members.
He argued that the military must demonstrate the consequences of betraying one’s country and attacking American troops.
Hegseth’s announcement that the execution would be publicly accessible immediately attracted national attention.
The Pentagon later confirmed plans for a livestream, although officials had not released complete details about how the broadcast would be distributed as of Friday morning.
Remembering the November 5, 2009, Fort Hood Massacre
On Nov. 5, 2009, Hasan, then a 39-year-old Army major and psychiatrist, entered the Soldier Readiness Processing Center at Fort Hood, Texas.
The facility was crowded with military personnel preparing for deployment and other assignments.
At approximately 1:30 p.m., Hasan opened fire on soldiers and civilians inside the building.
Witnesses reported hearing him shout “Allahu akbar” as the attack began.
Over approximately 10 minutes, Hasan fired repeatedly at individuals inside the facility.
Twelve soldiers and one civilian were killed.
Another 32 people were wounded.
The attack became one of the deadliest mass shootings at an American military installation.
Hasan was eventually shot by responding civilian police officers and survived, although he was left paralyzed from the chest down.
The massacre devastated military families and raised serious questions about security procedures, intelligence warnings and the military’s ability to identify threats within its own ranks.
Warning Signs Before the Attack
Investigations following the massacre revealed that Hasan had communicated with Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical American-born cleric associated with al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.
The communications became a central issue in subsequent examinations of whether federal authorities and military officials had missed opportunities to identify Hasan as a potential threat.
Hasan had also expressed increasingly radical views concerning American military operations in Muslim-majority countries.
Investigators examined whether concerns raised by colleagues and other officials had received adequate attention.
The attack intensified national debates over domestic terrorism, military security and the distinction between constitutionally protected religious beliefs and evidence of violent extremist activity.
Hasan later acknowledged responsibility for the shooting during his court-martial.
He claimed that his actions were intended to protect members of the Taliban from American military operations.
His statements became important evidence of his motivations, although the crimes for which he was convicted involved the murder and attempted murder of American service members and civilians.
Convicted and Sentenced to Death in 2013
In August 2013, a military court convicted Hasan of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder.
Hasan represented himself during portions of the proceedings and offered little defense against the evidence presented.
On Aug. 28, 2013, a military jury sentenced him to death.
However, the military justice system requires extensive appellate review before a death sentence can be carried out.
Hasan remained on military death row at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, while his case proceeded through the appeals process.
On March 31, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review his court-martial conviction.
The decision left the military judgment in place.
Under military law, the president must personally approve a death sentence before an execution can proceed.
Trump granted that approval Oct. 2, following a recommendation from Hegseth.
Acting Army Secretary Adam Telle signed the execution directive Oct. 6 and formally announced the date the following day.
Why a Firing Squad?
The selection of a firing squad represents a significant departure from the methods traditionally associated with modern American executions.
The U.S. military last carried out an execution in 1961, when Army Pvt. John Bennett was hanged after being convicted of rape and attempted murder.
The last known military execution by firing squad occurred during World War II.
Army Pvt. Eddie Slovik was executed by firing squad in France in January 1945 after being convicted of desertion.
Hasan’s scheduled execution would therefore represent a historic event within the American military justice system.
The Army has confirmed that the execution will be conducted under applicable military regulations.
However, questions remain about the precise procedures and public broadcasting arrangements.
The decision to livestream the execution has also generated debate among legal scholars and death penalty experts about the distinction between transparency and turning capital punishment into a public spectacle.
Families Have Waited Nearly 17 Years
For the families of those murdered at Fort Hood, the announcement represents another significant development in a case that has stretched across nearly two decades.
Thirteen people lost their lives during the attack.
Thirty-two others survived with injuries, and many families experienced lasting emotional and financial consequences.
The lengthy appeals process has meant that surviving relatives and wounded service members have waited years for a final resolution.
Some victims’ families have publicly supported the death penalty for Hasan.
Others have expressed complicated feelings about the lengthy proceedings and the attention surrounding his execution.
CBS Texas reported that family members received notification of the planned execution before the public announcement.
The approaching date is likely to renew painful memories of the attack and the loved ones who never returned home.
Whatever the differing views on capital punishment, the victims and their families remain central to the history of this case.
Renewed Debate Over How the Attack Was Classified
Hegseth also used his interview to criticize the Obama administration’s handling of the Fort Hood attack.
The defense secretary argued that the massacre had been improperly characterized as workplace violence rather than terrorism.
The controversy over that terminology dates back to the years following the shooting.
The Obama administration faced criticism from lawmakers, military families and victims who believed the attack should have been formally recognized as terrorism.
However, the historical record requires an important distinction.
The federal government did not uniformly deny that the attack involved terrorism. Different agencies and officials used different classifications for investigative, administrative and benefits-related purposes.
In 2015, the Defense Department announced that victims of the Fort Hood attack would receive Purple Hearts and related recognition after Congress changed the applicable eligibility criteria.
The disagreement over terminology remains politically significant, particularly among veterans and military families who argued that the victims deserved recognition for suffering injuries in a terrorist attack.
Hegseth’s remarks have revived that debate as the execution date approaches.
Can the Execution Still Be Delayed?
Although the Army has formally scheduled Hasan’s execution, additional legal proceedings could delay it.
Military death sentences are subject to extensive review, including the possibility of challenges in civilian federal courts.
The Death Penalty Information Center noted that Hasan retains the right to pursue federal habeas corpus proceedings.
Such a challenge could result in a stay of execution while courts consider outstanding legal claims.
Therefore, the Dec. 3 date is official, but the execution is not guaranteed to occur on schedule.
The military has indicated that the required internal appellate process has been completed.
Any additional litigation would have to proceed through the appropriate federal courts.
A Historic Decision With National Implications
The Trump administration’s decision to proceed with Hasan’s execution represents a major development in the federal government’s approach to military capital punishment.
For more than six decades, the United States military has maintained the legal authority to impose death sentences without carrying out an execution.
Hasan’s case could end that period.
The decision also raises broader questions about the purpose of capital punishment, the responsibilities of military personnel and the standards applied to service members who commit acts of violence against their fellow Americans.
Supporters of the execution argue that Hasan received a military trial, was convicted by a jury and exhausted the military appellate process.
Opponents of capital punishment question whether an execution serves justice and whether publicly broadcasting it is appropriate.
Those disagreements will likely intensify as December approaches.
Justice, Accountability and the Memory of Fort Hood
Seventeen years after the Fort Hood massacre, the families of 13 victims are approaching a moment they have waited years to see.
The military has determined that Hasan’s crimes warrant the death penalty, and the president has approved carrying out that sentence.
The case also serves as a reminder of the devastating consequences of violent extremism within the armed forces.
American service members should be able to prepare for deployment, receive medical treatment and perform their duties without fearing an attack from someone wearing the same uniform.
The Fort Hood massacre shattered that expectation.
The legal proceedings that followed demonstrated both the severity of the crimes and the extensive procedural requirements surrounding military capital punishment.
As the scheduled execution approaches, attention will turn to the remaining legal questions, the Pentagon’s plans for public access and the reactions of victims’ families.
For the 13 Americans murdered at Fort Hood, the passage of time has not diminished the significance of their loss.
Their names, service and sacrifice deserve to remain at the center of the national conversation.
And as the military prepares to carry out its first execution in more than six decades, the country faces a historic moment in the administration of military justice.
Original article
Comments