I freely admit there are few things President Donald Trump does that invite my approval. But his decision last week to cancel plans to livestream the execution of convicted Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan is among them.
“He will die, as scheduled, by firing squad, but this event will not be streamed,” Trump wrote last Thursday in a social media post.
It was the right decision, as public streaming of an execution would only further damage the international standing of America. It also was one that never should have been necessary.
In a 2009 shooting rampage, former Army major Hasan killed 13 service members and wounded dozens more at Fort Hood, Tex. Four years later, a military court convicted Hasan and sentenced him to death. His crimes were horrific, his victims deserved justice, and his scheduled execution by firing squad on Dec. 3 is warranted – depending, of course, on one’s position on the death penalty.
Regardless, justice and revenge are not equivalent. It is hardly surprising the idea of livestreaming Hasan’s execution came from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the former Fox TV host and Trump appointee who seems incapable of passing up any opportunity to grandstand, regardless of how distasteful the spectacle might be.
Hegseth also is behind Hasan’s method of execution. Rather than lethal injection at a federal facility in Indiana, as is standard procedure, at Hegseth’s direction Hasan will face a firing squad at Fort Hood, a further symbolic gesture departing from established U.S. military protocol.
Public bloodlust is real. Anger over Hasan’s crimes is justified. So, turning punishment into entertainment is not all that difficult to understand. But government- sanctioned justice has a responsibility beyond satisfying the public’s appetite for vengeance. Its actions should reflect the principles America claims to uphold, both at home and abroad.
The livestream proposal raised an obvious question: What, exactly, would America gain from a condemned man’s death being livestreamed to phones and laptops worldwide?
It seems most of America was asking the same question, as a joint ABC News/ Washington Post poll last week found 80-plus percent of respondents opposed livestreaming Hasan’s impending fate. Even 55 percent of self-identifying MAGA poll respondents said they opposed the livestreaming proposal.
Trump initially supported the idea, even as criticism mounted among Republicans, Democrats, and religious leaders alike. He reversed course Oct. 15, acknowledging that while a public broadcast might deter some would-be terrorists, most people would rather not watch a fellow human being executed.
Perhaps Trump also considered the optics of executing a man with a paralyzing bullet already lodged in his spine? A dead man slumped over in his wheelchair might not make for quite the triumphant image some members of his administration apparently envisioned.
We can be grateful the president reached that conclusion. We also can be troubled the idea got as far as it did.
A livestreamed execution would cross the line between administering justice and turning death into entertainment. No doubt, millions would have watched a human being killed by the state simply because the spectacle was available, not because they needed – or even wanted – to see it.
Some of Trump’s fellow Republicans immediately recognized the conflict. North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis condemned the proposal, comparing public executions to practices associated with oppressive dictatorships. Even Vice President JD Vance said he would not watch the online spectacle.
Their objections were not expressions of sympathy for Hasan. They reflected an understanding that a nation’s character is revealed by how it treats even its worst offenders.
That is the most disturbing part of this episode. The problem is not simply that top U.S. government officials considered livestreaming an execution. It is the idea it could be presented as a demonstration of American strength, as though our national resolve requires a public display of death.
Then again, this seems consistent with Hegseth’s approach. Not long ago we were watching grainy footage of boats allegedly carrying drug runners being blown out of the water, presumably by U.S. agents. But who really knows?
Now, the proposed spectacle was to be an execution; government-sanctioned death as entertainment for the masses.
So, I’m cautiously thankful Trump reversed course. He previously supported the plan and though canceling it now does not erase the judgment that allowed it to advance, it’s at least a positive development.
Until next time.